LGBTQA and Ally Safe Space

[SevenofSeven]

I'll be fine and it's been a long time coming

 

:how I see things:

With all the baby mama drama and other drama that is very prevalent at least in my area I don't see why people have a problem with polyamory. I mean seriously if a couple has no jealousy problems and can share love with multiple people and be in a strong loving familial relationship how is that worse than having 4 kids with 3 different women and not paying child support and/or having your kids see multiple boyfriends come in and out every night to the point that they think it's the norm.

 

basically, sharing love bad, fucking everything everyone without consequence perfectly acceptable (as long as it's not gay sex lol)

Sorry to see you're going through a tough time.

I agree with your summary, I have had to deal with people making judgements when I say I have 7 kids, the best part comes when I tell them they all have the same father, their faces are priceless.

[RES]

Thanks everyone for not yelling at me! I probably should have clarified that I was asking to figure out where I stand and not to question anyone else's preferences. I guess for now I'll just stick to "I like you, do you like me? Check Yes or No."

Yes!!

 

*goes back to catching up...

[BeautifulBeast]

I'll be fine and it's been a long time coming

 

:how I see things:

With all the baby mama drama and other drama that is very prevalent at least in my area I don't see why people have a problem with polyamory. I mean seriously if a couple has no jealousy problems and can share love with multiple people and be in a strong loving familial relationship how is that worse than having 4 kids with 3 different women and not paying child support and/or having your kids see multiple boyfriends come in and out every night to the point that they think it's the norm.

 

basically, sharing love bad, fucking everything everyone without consequence perfectly acceptable (as long as it's not gay sex lol)

The problem is cheating/lying/being an asshole is pretty much ingrained in our society at this point. Seriously, I think I know more (mono) couples that have infidelity problems than I do couples that have stayed faithful to each other. Then you turn on tv and what is every show have? Love triangles. Couples on the rocks and straying from one another. Affairs. It's dramatic and gives great ratings but it's also desensitized us to that kind of dynamic. 

If you look at the way poly style relationships are portrayed it's almost horrific. Generally it's a polygamist style dynamic that is based on either a cult (or cult like religious group), abuse or arranged marriages...or some combo of the three. It's a story of some poor 16 year old girl who was forced to marry her 55 year old uncle and has to deal with the cruelty of not only her elderly, relative husband but also her jealous sister wives. On tv, in books etc, it's hardly ever a choice. It's forced upon one or more of the members and so there's a huge stygma around it. Add to it that most people hide their lifestyle choice because of fear of career impacts, lost custody and ridicule so there's little real life experience with it, people don't get to see that in reality it's often a healthy, loving dynamic for everyone involved. 

I can't think of hardly any examples of positive poly in the media. Maybe Caprica and the teacher's poly family...but even that, she ended up being a cultist. So while the religious/cray-cray beliefs had nothing to do with her choice of relationship dynamic, the average joe isn't going to see it that way. They're going to see loving, multi-person relationship is common in nut jobs who prey on children and get them to blow up trains. 

[BeautifulBeast]

Double post....yea I'm bad about it

....sorry to go on a tangent. I may have some serious hang ups and problems with poly in my own marriage, but I understand 100% why it works, why it shouldn't be such a huge social gaff and why people choose to live that way ;-)

[ColoQ]

The problem is cheating/lying/being an asshole is pretty much ingrained in our society at this point. Seriously, I think I know more (mono) couples that have infidelity problems than I do couples that have stayed faithful to each other. Then you turn on tv and what is every show have? Love triangles. Couples on the rocks and straying from one another. Affairs. It's dramatic and gives great ratings but it's also desensitized us to that kind of dynamic. 

If you look at the way poly style relationships are portrayed it's almost horrific. Generally it's a polygamist style dynamic that is based on either a cult (or cult like religious group), abuse or arranged marriages...or some combo of the three. It's a story of some poor 16 year old girl who was forced to marry her 55 year old uncle and has to deal with the cruelty of not only her elderly, relative husband but also her jealous sister wives. On tv, in books etc, it's hardly ever a choice. It's forced upon one or more of the members and so there's a huge stygma around it. Add to it that most people hide their lifestyle choice because of fear of career impacts, lost custody and ridicule so there's little real life experience with it, people don't get to see that in reality it's often a healthy, loving dynamic for everyone involved. 

I can't think of hardly any examples of positive poly in the media. Maybe Caprica and the teacher's poly family...but even that, she ended up being a cultist. So while the religious/cray-cray beliefs had nothing to do with her choice of relationship dynamic, the average joe isn't going to see it that way. They're going to see loving, multi-person relationship is common in nut jobs who prey on children and get them to blow up trains. 

The best most realistic example of a poly setup I've seen in a movie or otherwise is "Savages."  Unfortunately the Poly triad in that run a large Marijuana growing operation.. so not totally positive. Though not Poly, but still kinda shows that "alternative setups" can be loving and healthy is the Episode of Bob's Burgers where they go to the senior citizen retirement community that is also a swinger's community.  I LOLed for days. 

[FamilyBeer]

The best most realistic example of a poly setup I've seen in a movie or otherwise is "Savages."  Unfortunately the Poly triad in that run a large Marijuana growing operation.. so not totally positive. Though not Poly, but still kinda shows that "alternative setups" can be loving and healthy is the Episode of Bob's Burgers where they go to the senior citizen retirement community that is also a swinger's community.  I LOLed for days. 

 

Savages = sex and drugs? Wow, I'm in!!!

 

It is by coincidence that in a lunch conversation the other day, it came up that retirement homes have a serious problem with SDEs. Who'd a thunk!

 

On a serious note, my opinion is that poly (polygamous and polyamorous(?)) relationships are very hard for humans because we're not genetically programmed for that, we are programmed for monogamous relationships. This does not necessarily mean that we can't have poly relationships, we just have to go above our genetics; at the same time, genetics doesn't mean that monogamous relationships will always work, human emotion and behaviour can derail monogamous relationships. I'm heterosexual, in a good monogamous relationship (marriage) with 2 children (7 kids is just plain stupid!!! LOL, that was for you 7of7) and I am Christian but I am accepting of any truly loving relationship. In fact, some of my best friends are gay (LOL, am I not required to say something stupid like that?).

 

Any relationship that does not include love and respect should be dissolved.

 

Edit: Wait a sec, that didn't come out as intended: I'm in a good monogamous relationship but not with 2 children, with my wife and we have 2 children. Whew, glad I corrected that one!!!

[Hit]

Im not programmed for monogamy. Ive never felt an instinct or an urge to be with just one person. Socially programmed or expected to eventually find "the one" and settle down and have some kids yes, but none of that has ever come from within. Monogamy (ie only having sex with one person) does not make sense to me.

[BeautifulBeast]

I don't think anyone is genetically programmed to be anything. Not as far as the species as a whole goes. If that were true and we are genetically programed based on societal norms, wouldn't that mean we are all supposed to be heterosexual as well? Would that mean being gay is a difficult choice for that person because they have to fight their straight instincts?

There are plenty of people out there who would argue the opposite and suggest that genetically speaking we are all wired for poly style relations. After all from a biological standpoin men need to get their sperms into as many fertile mates as possible to insure genetic diversity and therefore survival of the species. And historically speaking humanity has been in some form of poly relations longer than mono has been the norm. It wasn't until the Catholic Church got its position of power firmly set in the world that monogamy became the only way. Before that it was common to see polygamy as a marriage setup.

My husband is very much poly minded. I think he would ignore his sexuality for me but be miserable for it. I often do relate it to the same way a gay person can't just 'turn off' being gay. It's just who he is.

I think we have been conditioned by society to live a certain way and expect certain things from our spouses. But I doubt we are genetically molded for monogamy.

[FamilyBeer]

Im not programmed for monogamy. Ive never felt an instinct or an urge to be with just one person. Socially programmed or expected to eventually find "the one" and settle down and have some kids yes, but none of that has ever come from within. Monogamy (ie only having sex with one person) does not make sense to me.

 

It is strange for me to think about this because I can't imagine not being monogamous. What I mean is that while my wife is alive (not that she's sick or anything), I won't stray but if she passes away before me, especially, if I'm still fit and healthy, I can imagine looking for another partner for another monogamous relationship. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth but if you think that monogamous means a relationship with one person and if that person passes away, then no one else, that's not what I interpret monogamous to mean, just one person in a committed relationship at a time (dating to try to find that person is a little different situation).

[FamilyBeer]

I don't think anyone is genetically programmed to be anything. Not as far as the species as a whole goes. If that were true and we are genetically programed based on societal norms, wouldn't that mean we are all supposed to be heterosexual as well? Would that mean being gay is a difficult choice for that person because they have to fight their straight instincts?

 

A behavioural science professor of mine (was it really 30yrs ago??!!!) told us how homosexuality in a population benefited it but I can't remember the details.

 

If he is correct, then it would seem that there might be a gene for homosexuality (believe you me, I don't believe that it is a disease or anything like that) and in those people, they may have nothing to fight against and it wouldn't be a difficult choice (parental and societal pressure notwithstanding).

 

However, the population as a whole may be programmed as heterosexual.

 

I hope I don't say anything to offend, I'm probably quite ignorant of LGBTQA and I hope to learn from what others say here.

[Phytomancer]

I know my ignorance have caused a problem last time... but I don't want to stay ignorant. I want to be an LGBTQA ally. If any of them make you uncomfortable, please let me know and let me learn. If you think this is not a space for me to discuss these questions, please allow me to know as well. 

 

I think that when the population is at risk, having a heterosexual/ pansexual relationships are important because they keep producing offspring. In prosperous society like ours, however, every sexual orientation keeps the society rich and wholesome.Monogamy heterosexual relationships post some nice benefits in the older times. For example, males will be able to identify their own offspring, and the females will be confirmed that the males will devote the resources to her. Now that the gender roles are not as apparent, this too might not be necessary. 

 

I have an unrelated question. A few years ago, I rejected a pansexual, feminine man who had an interest in me. I respected him as a person, but it is not in my sexual orientation to feel attracted to him. I did not know how to explain this to him-- that I can only be attracted to women.

 

All I ended up doing was making him cry a lot and being called a sexist jerk. (He then hurt me later for hurting him) I don't want to hurt someone like that again. It felt horrible.

 

Do you guys know a way to deal with such situation?   

 

*Edit* After being commented that the question might have come from a troll, I inspected my question and reword some sentences to make sure I did not accidentally hurt people who come and read it.

[mascota]

I don't think anyone is genetically programmed to be anything. Not as far as the species as a whole goes. If that were true and we are genetically programed based on societal norms, wouldn't that mean we are all supposed to be heterosexual as well? Would that mean being gay is a difficult choice for that person because they have to fight their straight instincts?

I was totally going to take jrickards post and change polygamous to homosexual and monogamous to heterosexual. I think that saying to someone "yeah, I respect you, but you are acting against your genes" is plain stupid. Everyone is different and saying "being monogamous is ingrained in our genes" is exactly like saying "being heterosexual is ingrained in our genes". So, poly people are just trying to be different because it's cool or what?

 

Related to this:

I think that when the population is at risk, having a heterosexual/ pansexual relationships are important because they keep producing offspring. In prosperous society like ours, however, every sexual orientation keeps the society rich and wholesome.Monogamy heterosexual relationships post some nice benefits in the older times. For example, males will be able to identify their own offspring, and the females will be confirmed that the males will devote the resources to her. Now that the gender roles are not as apparent, this too might not be necessary.

Fun fact:

I think it's a common misbelief this thing about "monogamous partners are better because they guarantee providing for offsprings". Many mammals use the exact opposite technique. Males mate with all females within their pack to get their sperm in as many females as possible (so they preserve their genes) and females mate with as many males as possible too because that way all males will protect and provide for the babies, and they won't kill them (they won't see them as "rival's offspring").

 

About the rejection: I can't tell what went wrong or why he called you a sexist jerk. It's possible you said something rude, but it's also possible that the guy weren't ready for your rejection and just had a terrible reaction. I always handle rejections the same way: avoiding any kind of discussion about gender/sex/personal preferences. I say "I'm sorry, I just don't feel attracted to you". You don't need to explain further, seriously. If the person asks why I say "I don't know, it's just the way I feel". That way people don't get hurt and understand that nothing can be done.

[FamilyBeer]

Despite the hairs raising up on the back of my neck, that this question is from a troll, I'm going to go ahead and take a stab at answering it.

 

It is disappointing to be attracted to a person who isn't attracted to you, especially if you have established a good friendship with that person. However, given the intensity of your friends response, this is more than just a response to your "rejection", there is something troubling this person. You may think it would be good for you to try to console this person but that could lead to more and possibly more intense outbursts. I suggest you back off and let the person settle down and maybe you can establish a relationship that is comfortable for both of you, maybe not.

[FamilyBeer]

Related to this:

Fun fact:

I think it's a common misbelief this thing about "monogamous partners are better because they guarantee providing for offsprings". Many mammals use the exact opposite technique. Males mate with all females within their pack to get their sperm in as many females as possible (so they preserve their genes) and females mate with as many males as possible too because that way all males will protect and provide for the babies, and they won't kill them (they won't see them as "rival's offspring").

 

Animals differ from species to species; for some fish species, the males look after the offspring, other species, the females; in some birds species. females mate with a different male each year, other bird species have the same partner for their lives. You can't generalize and say other mammals do it, therefore all mammals do the same thing.

 

I believe that human genetics is programmed for monogamy just like human genetics is programmed for an omnivorous diet: however, humans are intelligent enough to challenge their genetics and live happily in polygamous relationships as vegetarians. As far as I am concerned, as long as they are happy, healthy and making a positive contribution to society, I'm good with that.

[BeautifulBeast]

Animals differ from species to species; for some fish species, the males look after the offspring, other species, the females; in some birds species. females mate with a different male each year, other bird species have the same partner for their lives. You can't generalize and say other mammals do it, therefore all mammals do the same thing.

 

I believe that human genetics is programmed for monogamy just like human genetics is programmed for an omnivorous diet: however, humans are intelligent enough to challenge their genetics and live happily in polygamous relationships as vegetarians. As far as I am concerned, as long as they are happy, healthy and making a positive contribution to society, I'm good with that.

Again, the problem with that is as a whole the human species has been monogamous for far less time than we have been in poly-styled relationships. In parts of the world polygamy (and it's far less common counterpart polyandry) are still the norm. Monogamy is really more of a western & modern civilization invention than it is a programmed behavior. It's a cultural norm. One could argue that monogamy is a benefit of a thriving civilization because we no longer need to populate the planet with as diverse of genetics as possible. 

And beyond that, for a long time monogamy was used as a sort of currency. You didn't marry for love, you married for status, for financial stability and to unite two clans/tribes/families. You pledged your life to one person in a business deal and then went off and fucked the next door neighbor or the servants.  

 I don't believe that genetics necessarily play a part one way or the other in developing a poly or mono civilization. I think that the poly or mono majority of any particular group is based more on the cultural norms and the religious beliefs of the people because poly & mono both evolve and change in every culture through the years. What is the norm for us now will not be the norm in 100 years. I have a feeling that as younger generations of us stop seeing sex as some all important and also dirty & shameful event we will start leaning towards poly. Heck, with how much cheating that goes on in our culture we are pretty much set up for it now.  If you pop some consent and communication into these 'mono' relationship models that involve one or both partners straying then you have a poly culture. 

[Phytomancer]

Despite the hairs raising up on the back of my neck, that this question is from a troll, I'm going to go ahead and take a stab at answering it.

 

It is disappointing to be attracted to a person who isn't attracted to you, especially if you have established a good friendship with that person. However, given the intensity of your friends response, this is more than just a response to your "rejection", there is something troubling this person. You may think it would be good for you to try to console this person but that could lead to more and possibly more intense outbursts. I suggest you back off and let the person settle down and maybe you can establish a relationship that is comfortable for both of you, maybe not.

 

Thanks for your advice. Nope. Not a troll. I know this is rare, but it was my case. We had been friends, and he misinterpreted the friendship. People have met someone like that within any orientations-- those who don't respond well to rejections. This has happened years ago, but it still made me sad thinking about it.

 

I have tried to console him, talked to him and made sure he was okay-- nope-- things got worse. I think it's just him as an individual. However, it's just difficult to explain to him. I started with "I'm not interested" at first. And he went all like 'Am I too skinny? too wrinkly? too ugly? too pimply?' and I want to have an answer that did not hurt his self esteem.

 

I have backed off and now the wounds are healed both for me and for him, but for next time, would I be better saying that I am not interested in him as a person?  

 

 I can't tell what went wrong or why he called you a sexist jerk. It's possible you said something rude, but it's also possible that the guy weren't ready for your rejection and just had a terrible reaction. 

 

Possibly both. I was younger, and even now I say insensitive things regarding these issues. That's why I want to learn and improve. The event leading up to it was when I admitted that if he was a woman, I might date him.

 

I think it's a common misbelief this thing about "monogamous partners are better because they guarantee providing for offsprings". Many mammals use the exact opposite technique. Males mate with all females within their pack to get their sperm in as many females as possible (so they preserve their genes) and females mate with as many males as possible too because that way all males will protect and provide for the babies, and they won't kill them (they won't see them as "rival's offspring").

 

 

I don't think it's better. I think it's a certain social behavior based on the limitation of those times which might not be applicable in the modern society. And yes, there are other construct too.

[mascota]

Animals differ from species to species; for some fish species, the males look after the offspring, other species, the females; in some birds species. females mate with a different male each year, other bird species have the same partner for their lives. You can't generalize and say other mammals do it, therefore all mammals do the same thing.

 

I believe that human genetics is programmed for monogamy just like human genetics is programmed for an omnivorous diet: however, humans are intelligent enough to challenge their genetics and live happily in polygamous relationships as vegetarians. As far as I am concerned, as long as they are happy, healthy and making a positive contribution to society, I'm good with that.

Yeah, you are right. What I wanted to say is, you can't say "this behavior works better than that" because everything can work if correctly applied.

Your post reminded me an article I read a while ago about birds that "mate for their lives", they actually cheat as hell. Not that monogamous haha

 

As others said before, polygamy is pretty common in our species if you take things into perspective. Same thing goes for homo/bisexuality (going back to the original topic haha), if you go back into pre-christian history you will find a lot of non-heterosexual behaviors. We all know about Greece. Celts were very open-minded and had sex with both partners and strangers, also homo/bisexual behaviors are well documented among men and women. There are lots of examples.

[FamilyBeer]

This has been enlightening, thank you all!!

[SevenofSeven]

I like Bonobo monkeys, I think they may have the way of it!

The bonobo is popularly known for its high levels of sexual behavior. Sex functions in conflict appeasement, affection, social status, excitement, and stress reduction. It occurs in virtually all partner combinations and in a variety of positions. This is a factor in the lower levels of aggression seen in the bonobo when compared to the common chimpanzee and other apes. Bonobos are perceived to be matriarchal and a male's rank in the social hierarchy is often determined by his mother's rank.

Thank you wiki!

Not making light of the posts above, it has been very interesting to see so many differing ideas on such a previously taboo topic.

[ColoQ]

Honestly skimmed a lot of the discussion for the past few pages. SO I'm not going to give a nuanced response to any discussion point. But I want to poke at something that I think hasn't been hit upon by either side of this discussion.

 

If you don't think it is "normal" in the broader "programming" of a culture, or of our (meaning Human's) biology, thats fine. I just don't want that perspective of "normality" to form the basis of discrimination. And here is the thing: discrimination isn't just auto-failed job interviews, firings, and negative media portrayals.

I have a married friend who is a technical writer, and used to go to lunch with her coworker - a single guy - the guy who handles her company's press releases. Somewhere  along the way, he found her poly oriented profile on OK Cupid. Suddenly he stopped going to lunch with her. And it wasn't until a few weeks later, that she realized that this was impacting her job. Over a set of regular lunches / in the course of normal conversation he would clue her in on which press releases management was pushing to have completed. This gave her a leg up on polishing up the documentation for those products. Now she is constantly having to stay late to finish something at the last minute.  She went from the most punctual person I know, to someone who flakes on plans. 

 

Small "icks" can have large impact. 

[Missmouse]

 I have a feeling that as younger generations of us stop seeing sex as some all important and also dirty & shameful event we will start leaning towards poly.

 

I don't really agree with this.  I think people are going to be wired one way or another (or anywhere along the spectrum).  The idea that people are 100% influenced by our surrounding culture is just as inaccurate as saying we're 100% wired by our genetics. Some people are poly and some people are mono.  Some people are straight, some are gay, some are bi, some are asexual.  'Tis what it is.

 

On another note, try being mono in the kink community.  We're actually the minority there.  It's an interesting experience!

[BeautifulBeast]

I don't really agree with this. I think people are going to be wired one way or another (or anywhere along the spectrum). The idea that people are 100% influenced by our surrounding culture is just as inaccurate as saying we're 100% wired by our genetics. Some people are poly and some people are mono. Some people are straight, some are gay, some are bi, some are asexual. 'Tis what it is.

On another note, try being mono in the kink community. We're actually the minority there. It's an interesting experience!

So I definitely did poorly explaining my thoughts with that. I suck at words at 5am and before my pre workout kicks in haha. I don't think everyone will become poly or even that the majority will be, I think more people will come out as poly and poly will become more widely accepted as a relationship model. I know the population isn't 100% of anything. I just think ignorance on the subject (or of anything poly beyond polygamy) leads to people who don't understand their feelings and beliefs to be anything other than wrong and unique only to them. I think as the stigma lifts a bit more people with stand up and say they are poly.

That said I understand mono in a kink world. I myself identify as mono. I'm trying my damndest to be accepting of my husband as poly as well as test the dating other people waters myself but it's hard for me. And the kink community being what an awesome place for some to run to for answers isn't such a great place for a mono minded person. Usually I end up feeling like I'm just a horrid, jealous person who is just brainwashed into believing mono is the only way. For the most part my poly experience has been being lonely while my husband goes out and enjoys his life. Wheeee. (Right now I feeling the weight of monogamy for sure. Just wishing I wasn't so damn alone all the time!)

[Missmouse]

So I definitely did poorly explaining my thoughts with that. I suck at words at 5am and before my pre workout kicks in haha. I don't think everyone will become poly or even that the majority will be, I think more people will come out as poly and poly will become more widely accepted as a relationship model. I know the population isn't 100% of anything. I just think ignorance on the subject (or of anything poly beyond polygamy) leads to people who don't understand their feelings and beliefs to be anything other than wrong and unique only to them. I think as the stigma lifts a bit more people with stand up and say they are poly.

 

This does make sense, and I'm hopeful that the change will happen soon and quickly.  Kind of like with marriage equality.  Even though there is a long way to go, the tide is turning at an amazing rate.  And a lot of that has to do with gay/lesbian oriantation becoming more 'normalized' in popular culture, leading to more people coming out, leading to more people knowing someone who is gay, leading to increased acceptance.  The more gay people are seen as 'normal people' (because, duh, they are), the better things get.  This was difficult back in the day where most people only had exposure to terrible stereotypes. 

 

Like mentioned above, the examples of different types of poly seen in popular culture are almost universally negative, which in turn makes it harder for people to be out, which in turn, yadda, yadda, yadda.  At some point, there needs to be a shift, and in my opinion it can't happen soon enough.

 

Also - kudos to you for making a mono/poly relationship work.  I've known several people who have been successful with that arrangement, but I'm in no way equiped to handle it.  When I was searching for my current D-type, my biggest dealbreaker was poly.  I've tried dipping my toes in those waters, and learned an important lesson. Mainly, that I'm 100% mono.  Hope things continue to go well for you!

[Bekah]

So I definitely did poorly explaining my thoughts with that. I suck at words at 5am and before my pre workout kicks in haha. I don't think everyone will become poly or even that the majority will be, I think more people will come out as poly and poly will become more widely accepted as a relationship model. I know the population isn't 100% of anything. I just think ignorance on the subject (or of anything poly beyond polygamy) leads to people who don't understand their feelings and beliefs to be anything other than wrong and unique only to them. I think as the stigma lifts a bit more people with stand up and say they are poly.

That said I understand mono in a kink world. I myself identify as mono. I'm trying my damndest to be accepting of my husband as poly as well as test the dating other people waters myself but it's hard for me. And the kink community being what an awesome place for some to run to for answers isn't such a great place for a mono minded person. Usually I end up feeling like I'm just a horrid, jealous person who is just brainwashed into believing mono is the only way. For the most part my poly experience has been being lonely while my husband goes out and enjoys his life. Wheeee. (Right now I feeling the weight of monogamy for sure. Just wishing I wasn't so damn alone all the time!)

Im sorry its so hard for you *hugs*

[Spark]

Bisexuals are attracted to men and women. It's usually a bit more complicated when someone doesn't fall into either category.

Pansexuals are attracted to cooking utensils. Or is that fryingpansexuals?

 

Omnomnomisexuals?