Laws Vary Regarding Relationships Between Consenting Adults

We've heard so many different misunderstandings about laws as they apply to relationships and sex between consenting adults. Here in the US, it is especially understandable because laws vary from state to state. There are, of course, fifty states, but there are also other jurisdictions such as the District of Columbia, territories, such as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and there are also federal laws, military codes, and laws that apply to "Indian reservations" (small areas where indigenous peoples have some level of self-determination).

If you are concerned about the laws where you are or where you're considering moving, it would be a good idea to see if the laws of that location are searchable online and to consult an attorney who specializes in family or criminal law for that jurisdiction. An experienced lawyer can tell you about how often a law is enforced even if it is still in effect, and might be able to point out ways someone could make it less likely they'd ever be prosecuted.

Some states have laws still on the books that have been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The only reason to still have those laws is a deranged hope that the Court decision will eventually be reversed.

Unmarried sex or cohabitation, interracial relationships, same-sex relationships, certain sex positions, even using contraception or sex toys have all been illegal in some places in the US. It might seem shocking, but it is true.

As the show "Sister Wives" detailed, Utah had been the last state to enforce a law against polyfidelity, or at least saying more than one person is your spouse. We're not even talking about insurance coverage or anything like that. Simply saying that you have more than one spouse has been illegal. It's outrageous, but true.

When it comes to consanguinamory, confusion ranges from "I thought it was illegal everywhere for cousins to have sex" to "There are no laws against consenting adults having sex, no matter how closely related." Both statements are false.

The fact is, first cousins are incarcerated for having sex in a handful of US states. But about half of US states will allow first cousins to legally marry (and the list of states isn't what stereotypes would have you believe), although some of them have some restrictions. That leaves many states where where they can have sex, live together, raise children together, but can't legally marry. Outrageous, but true.

As far as relatives closer than that, in general, 47 states have laws against relatives closer than first cousins having sex. Ohio allows siblings to be together. Rhode Island and New Jersey have no laws against adults being together, no matter how closely related. Some other states apparently haven't criminalized sex between adults and their uncles or aunts (outside of old, overturned laws that criminalized unmarried sex, given that these people weren't allowed to marry.)

None of the states will knowingly allow relatives closer than first cousins to legally marry, with certain exceptions in certain states for uncles and nieces, for example, mostly a nod to traditions from foreign cultures. Traditions are not respected, however, when it comes to having more than one legal spouse.

Note that these criminalization laws and laws denying marriage rights tend to apply to genetic ("blood") relatives even if they were legally adopted to different families and never met until well into adulthood.

Some states may have relied on criminalization of homosexuality (which was overturned) and thus might not have anti-incest laws that technically criminalize same-sex consanguinmory. Laws can get very specific, outlawing certain sex acts but not others between certain people. Yes, as silly as it sounds, some specific sex acts that don't harm anyone have been illegal in some places.

The patchwork of unjust laws needs to be changed. There shouldn't be anywhere in the US (or any other country for that matter) where consenting adults are denied their basic rights to have a mutual relationship that includes whatever form of sex they want to have, living together, and, if they want, marriage, or any other union or partnership offered under law. Nobody should fall in love and then worry that if they move for a job they won't be able to marry in their new state or might even be criminals.

There's no good reason to deny these rights. In the US, it should be obvious that legal precedents have determined that such discrimination is unjust and unconstitutional. But people are understandably confused as many unjust laws are still enforced.

We Are Here For Love, Not Hate

I just wanted to post a reminder, for reasons, that this blog is here to spread love, affirmation, understanding, and support.

Hate, prejudice, and bigotry have no place here.

Everyone is welcome to leave comments on the posts and pages of this blog, but hateful comments are likely to go unpublished. They might get used as fodder in a new entry on the blog, where they will get analyzed and exposed for the bigotry they are.

We support the rights of all to share love, sex, kink, residence, partnerships & marriage.

Thank you!

Intergenerational Relationships Aren't Automatically Abusive

After I boosted my post "Intergenerational Relationships Can Work" on the (DEFUNCT) Tumblr counterpart to this blog. (And again, we are talking about ADULTS.) This prompted someone to anonymously message that Tumblr blog...

Oh, hey! Somehow I didn't notice you supported intergenerational relationships, and I checked your answers to common objections and there was no reference to it, so may I direct you to a couple of links you might find interesting? They are against intergenerational relationships, but they might have notions you haven't considered.

From what I could see, the objections to intergenerational relationships (generally meaning 20 or more years difference in age) or even just age-gap relationships (less than 20, but, say ages 18 vs. 24 or 30 vs. 45) were all variations on the "power imbalance" argument.

Lies and Damned Lies About Polygamy

[Note: I am bumping up this previous entry because it is as relevant as ever. Polygamy is not something to escape from, fear, or prosecute. Abusive people are. Polygamy doesn't harm women, children, or teen boys, abusers do. The same goes for monogamy.]

Good ol’ tool of anti-equality forces, Professor Joe Henrich of the University of B.C., is back in the news. This article comes with a picture of Bountiful, B.C. (which is NOT the picture shown here) along with this text…

New research says that polygamy, which is practiced in Bountiful, B.C., leads to increased crime.

Right. Everyone avoids driving near Bountiful because of the high crime rate.

Prof. Joe Henrich found that when rich men take more than one wife, it leaves a deficit of women leading to increased fighting and competition for the remaining women.

Got that? You non-wealthy or unmarried guys are just a bunch of criminals.

Henrich is taking about women as though they have no minds of their own and are nothing but property, akin to cars.

Rich men can “take” more than one woman, marriage or not. Shall we ban all nonmonogamy? Or, since it might lower the crime rate according to this line of thinking, shall we require a woman to find an unmarried man and keep him busy so he won’t go around being a violent criminal?

"You have low-status men who are desperate for resources," said Henrich, a professor in the departments of psychology and economics. "More polygamy leads to a greater proportion of unmarried men, which leads to increased crime."

How does Henrich explain “low status” men who marry a woman and support her decision to not earn income as she tends to the children or earn less income than she and their children will spend? Wouldn’t it make sense, in Henrich’s view, for such men to never marry and have children, so as to be less “desperate for resources?”

Henrich and his co-authors studied societies where polygamy is prevalent, trying to discover the consequences.

Did they also conclude that polygamy causes high amounts of melanin?

"The scarcity of marriageable women in polygamous cultures increases competition among men for the remaining unmarried women," said Henrich. "The greater competition increases the likelihood men in polygamous communities will resort to criminal behaviour to gain resources and women."

I wonder why the article doesn’t cite examples?

I also wonder how much funding for this, or how much of Henrich’s pay, comes from the very government that has banned the polygamous freedom to marry and is actively attacking polygynous families?

We’ve already debunked all of this here, here, here, here, here, and here. We will need many more dung beetles to clear this pile up.

An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults. These excuses to deny full marriage equality are flimsy masks that fail to hide festering bigotry.

Ten Myths About Sibling Consanguinamory

I’ve noticed some common myths expressed about sibling consanguinamory. In this instance, by consanguinamory, I mean everything from curious exploration and experimenting to erotic romance, including masturbating in front of each other, erotic kissing, sexual touching or rubbing, oral sex, intercourse, etc.

This entry is NOT addressing molestation, assault, or abuse.

I’m referring to adult siblings, or minor siblings who are close in age, engaging in mutual affection or experimentation, without coercion, force, or intimidation. It may be two siblings alone, it may be three or more siblings, or it may be two or more siblings involved together with one or more people outside of the immediate family.

These myths need to be addressed, because they perpetuate inequality, discrimination, hardship, confusion, stigmas, ignorance, and fear.

Myth #1 “It doesn’t happen” or “It happens very rarely” or “I don’t know anyone who has done this.” Just because one person hasn’t been involved or doesn’t remember being involved with sibling doesn’t mean it isn’t happening with others. It is, and it always has. Ongoing sexual relationships between siblings are common enough that everyone knows someone who is, or has been in, such a relationship, and far more siblings than that have had an encounter or experimented, explored, or played doctor. Reality: We all know people who've been involved, whether we know it or not.

NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #5

“It's not natural." Many people have been embarrassed by making this argument, because it is so easy to refute by a cursory survey of sexual, mating, and partnering habits of various animals. But invariably, the person saying that a relationship should not be allowed because they think it is unnatural constantly enjoys things that aren’t natural, from their smart phones to their toiletries to their food to their clothing to their transportation to their housing… on and on it goes. “Hey! You can’t ride a bicycle! It’s not natural!” See how ridiculous that is?

There is no good reason to deny an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion, 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.

Feel free to share, copy and paste, and otherwise distribute. This has been adapted from this page at Full Marriage Equality: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #4

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #6 

NOT a Good Reason to Deny (Polyamorous) Love #16

“Some men will be left out as polygyny increases.” This is based on the assumption that in a culture with gender equality, polygyny would still be more plentiful than polyandry. Anti-equality people, based on this assumption, insist that this will result in unmarried men devolving into criminals.

The mistake here is assuming that the second, third, etc. wives in a polygynous marriage would have wanted one of those unmarried men rather than legally sharing the man they did marry, and that the unmarried men would in turn want to marry them. Some of those men may want to marry men, or not marry at all. Why not allow people to marry the person or people of their choice? Why try to force people to settle? Also, the system is not closed. There are billions of people in the world and more and more people are reaching the age and status of eligibility every second.

There was a study attempting to link polygny to criminal behavior in unmarried/unpartnered men based in part on nineteenth century frontier America. Things have changed a little since then. And guess what? Married men commit crime, too. Most of the men in prison have been married, were married or had at least one girlfriend at the time they were convicted.

Maybe men in the hypothetical polygynous community who don’t get married are violent people. Is it better that they have a wife to beat instead of committing crimes on the street? I don’t want to be the one who tells a woman she can’t marry the man/men or woman/women she wants; rather, she has to marry a less desirable man so that he can take his aggression out on her.

The warnings that polyamorous or polygamous freedom to marry will result in an increase of violent gangs of unmarried men committing crimes falls flat when one considers the overwhelming data revealing both that 1) Men in the US are getting married for the first time later than ever, and 2) Crime rates in the US have decreased.

There is no good reason to deny an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion, the right 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.

Feel free to share, copy and paste, and otherwise distribute. This has been adapted from this page at Full Marriage Equality: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny (Polyamorous) Love #15 

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny (Consanguineous) Love #17

Support the Rights of All Women

March 8 is International Women's Day.

All women should be free to be themselves, to have their basic human and civil rights, whether they are cisgender, transgender, or noncomforming or fluid; whether they are asexual, heterosexual, lesbian, bisexual, polysexual, or pansexual; whether they are aromantic, celibate, monogamous, or nonmonogamous. Whether their relationships are exogamous, endogamous, or consanguineous. Whether they are questioning or they are certain. Whether they are raising children or have raised children or not. Whether they are married or partnered or single.

A woman, regardless of her birth, sexual orientation, relationship orientation, race, or religion, should be free to share love, sex, kink, residence, and marriage (and any of those without the others) with ANY and ALL consenting adults, without fear of prosecution, bullying, shaming, or discrimination.

(Same goes for any other adults, too.)

Consanguinamory is Not Sick

As this blog and others have repeatedly shown, there is no good reason to keep laws, discrimination, or stigmas against consanguinamory (consanguineous or consensual incest sex or relationships) that is consistently applied to other relationships. One of the grasping-at-straws assertions that one might make when all of their justifications for denying rights fails is "people who do that are sick" or "those relationships are dysfunctional."

Before we do anything else, let's make it clear that we're talking about consensual sex and relationships, not abuse. It's not fair to point to abuse, assault, child molestation, etc. by a close relative as an example of how "incest" is "sick".

Alleging psychological problems or mental illness is something best left to mental health professionals, such as a psychiatrist (a medical doctor) or a psychologist. The opinion of someone without such credentials and some experience should be suspect. So, if someone makes the claim that we should criminalize or otherwise discriminate against consanguinamory because the behavior is based on mental illness, they should be asked 1) for their credentials; 2) if they have personally conducted an evaluation of the individuals involved and the dynamics of their relationship, and; 3) if all relationships they personally think are based on mental illness should be likewise criminalized or discriminated against. Usually, calling consanguinamory "sick" is just a thinly veiled variation on Discredited Arguments #1 and 3.

Frequently Asked Question: Why Is Incest Illegal?

It shouldn’t be illegal anywhere, as you’ll see. As always, we note that we are talking about consensual incest (consanguinamory), such as between consenting adults, and between minors close in age. We are not talking about anything involving coercion or force or molestation. There are laws against rape, assault, and molestation, and they should remain. We are talking about consensual incest, consanguineous sex and marriage, and consanguinamory, whether initiated through Genetic Sexual Attraction or not.

Short answer: It isn’t illegal everywhere, but where it is, it is the lingering result of sex-police holdovers, superstition, prejudice, and legislative inertia.

Long answer:

NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #4

“My religion is against it.” If you don’t want an (adult) intergenerational, interracial, same-gender, polygamous, or consanguineous relationship or marriage, then don’t have one. But we should all have the freedoms of religion and association and in places like the US, we have separation of church and state, so this can’t be a justification for denying marriage equality or other relationships rights.

There is no good reason to deny an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion, 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.

Feel free to share, copy and paste, and otherwise distribute. This has been adapted from this page at Full Marriage Equality: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #3

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #5 

A Cruel Double Standard

I've considered adding another entry to the Discredited Arguments page, because I've heard and read people say that people in consanguinamorous relationships (or step or adoptive relationships that have gone romantic) don't need the freedom to marry because they're already family. In addition to being as senseless as telling a woman she can't marry her sister's husband's brother (which is legal and does happen) because they are already family, the statement can bring up a very cruel double standard.

In many situations involving Genetic Sexual Attraction, the lovers are not legally family for the purposes of insurance, benefits, taxes, hospital visitation, next of kin, etc. because they were adopted into or born into (via sperm, egg, or embryo donation) different families. Also, in many places, when a married woman gives birth, the child is legally her spouse's child as well. What if, due to sex with someone other than her spouse, the woman's child is genetically a half-sibling to another married couple's child, and as adults they decide they'd like to marry?

The double standard is that, while these genetically related people don't enjoy the benefits of being family, in places that still have ridiculous laws discriminating against consensual adult incest, they are considered family and thus can (and are) criminally prosecuted for consensual sex or at least denied their right to marry.

You're not family so you can't get the benefit of being family. You are family so you are going to be prosecuted for having loved each other in sexual way. That's cruel.

As an example, if something were to happen to Melissa and she ended up in a hospital, her adoptive parents could bar Matthew and Linda from even being by her side, let alone making decisions about her care, even though Matthew and Linda are, for practical purposes, her spouses. She would be married to them if she could, but the law isn't there yet.

Those who are sharing, or want to share their lives as spouses or partners often do need the same rights, benefits, and protections as any other spouses, and there’s no good reason to deny them their fundamental right to marry. Also, marriage automatically provides for next-of-kin status, which is especially important when there is some discord between at least one of the lovers and legal family members outside of the consanguinamorous relationship.

There are many cruel double standards when trying to tell other consenting adults how to love each other. GSA or not, consanguinamorous people need discriminatory laws to be done away with, and need access to the protections provided by marriage, if they want them. This is yet another reason we need full marriage equality sooner rather than later.

Navigating the Holiday Season

The year-end holidays are here.

If you might be getting together with family for Thanksgiving (USA), Hanukkah, Winder Solstice, Christmas, Kwanzaa, New Year's Eve/Day, or any other holiday coming up, you might be facing specific decisions and considerations, especially if you're in an interracial relationship or an age gap relationship, or are LGBTQ+, nonmonogamous, consanguinamorous, or are exploring/living out kinks and certain dynamics:

• Avoiding hostile people
• Keeping closeted
• Coming out
• Making a move

You are under no obligation to spend holidays with people who are hostile to you because of your gender, orientation, relationships, or kinks, even if they are related to you. Repeat that to yourself as needed.

That being said, if there is just one or two hostile people and there will be dozen or more other people, consider if you can go and simply avoid the hostile people. Some families and gatherings allow for that.

What you tell people, how, and when, is up to you. If you're not ready to come out to the people you'd be spending time with, you shouldn't have to. Or, if you think coming out now to one, more, or all of the people who will be there would be best, you'll need to prepare yourself for emotionally for that.

As far as making a move, if there is a person or people likely to be there you want to "get closer to," whether relatives or family friends, plan ahead for the possibilities. Will there be a way to get them alone? Would it be good to get things in motion ahead of time through texts, messages, video chats, calls, etc.? Or do you want to wait until you're face to face to get things in motion or back into motion, as the situation might be.

Plan ahead and make the most of the season. What that means is up to you. For some of you, it will be making plans with friends and "found family" or your partner(s) and their families. Others will make the most of their opportunities by going "home." Plans can change, and that's fine. But do consider what you might want to do.

If you need someone to talk with or to give you feedback about your plans, or you just want to say hello to Keith, you can do so, as always, by emailing fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com or message him on Wire at fullmarriageequality or on Facebook.

You can also comment with your thoughts, plans, or past experiences below.

NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #3

“Not a lot of people want to do it” or “I don’t want to do it.” This is not a justification for keeping something illegal. If anything, it is a reason laws against consensual adult relationships are wasteful and unnecessary. But we don’t deny minorities rights based on majority vote. Also, people would be surprised to know just how many people around them are in, or want to be in, or have been in, a relationship that is currently illegal or otherwise discriminated against.

There is no good reason to deny an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion, the right to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any and all consenting adults without prosecution, bullying, or discrimination.

Feel free to share, copy and paste, and otherwise distribute. This has been adapted from this page at Full Marriage Equality: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html


Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #2

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #4

Innocent Bystanders Hurt by the Closet

Leo Aspen, who leaves thoughtful comments here from time to time, left a comment worthy of being highlighted as a post. I will redact certain words because I don’t want them published on the blog, even as comments, because I want this blog to be as “safe for work” as a blog with this subject matter can be.

Leo’s thoughts are his. I’m simply sharing them.

Here’s is what Leo shared…

*****

I read a post on Reddit today:
https://www.reddit.com/r/survivinginfidelity/comments/1ovarir/triggered_today_by_tiktok/ which I cite below.

It touches on two of the most painful topics of human relationships - "incest"/consanguinamory and infidelity.

Of course, on the r/survivinginfidelity sub, everyone quite rightly curses OP's husband for infidelity, and "incest" with his sister serves as an additional fuel and "aggravating circumstance." Redditors also relish the fact that almost all of his family are habitual cheaters, that is, "the apple doesn't fall far from the apple tree."

Can we say something in defense of this incestuous couple, given that our community supports consanguinamory?

There seems to be only one argument: if society, the state, and religion had been tolerant of sexually romantic relationships between blood relatives, then most likely the OP's husband would never have married her, and the brother and sister would have been able to live as a "normal couple."

But this is a very weak, ambiguous excuse based on the obviously unacceptable "if something had happened" defense argument.

The brother and sister had several honest ways to be together. A brother might not have married an OP, knowing that he loved his sister.

If their feelings had flared up after the wedding he could have divorced his wife and only then started cohabiting with his sister.

Or, by staying married for the sake of children, he and she might not cross the line. And in these cases, our sympathies would be unconditionally on their side. 

But they preferred a dirty affair rather than a decent, morally justified relationship. And with their irresponsible behavior, they destroyed 2 families causing irreparable damage to the children.

But these siblings have also done great damage to the goals of Full Marriage Equality by linking the concepts of "incest" and "infidelity" together in the minds of many people. "Look, they say, everyone who has had sexual relations with relatives has proved once again that they are trash." And we won't be able to prove these people wrong.

Incest/consanguinamy, like any sexually romantic relationship between unrelated people, should be ethical and should not cause moral or physical harm to third parties. Only in this case do we have a chance that society will someday be tolerant of any sexual identification and the free choice of any sexual partner(s) by any person.

[Below is what Leo found on Reddit]
.............................................................................
u/Smart-Cod4884

Triggered today by tiktok
Need Support
So f—-info broken today and trying not to lose my s—- in front of my kids.

Saw a post today that said "my lacy is my boyfriends sister" which from what I gathered its someone that you envy to the point of hating them bc they have everything you could ever want. One of the top comments said "at least she cant steal your man"

My husband's sister is my lacy and she did steal my man. My husband cheated on me with his own sister. What the f—- did I do to deserve that. It has been so incredibly hard trying to work through this. I trusted him. I trusted her. She was in our wedding. I didnt get the option. I wouldnt have married him. I would've cut my losses and moved far far away. I didnt find out until I was 30 weeks pregnant with our second child, 4 years into them sleeping together. Every time we went to any family event they were sneaking away. While I was in the same house. While our child was in the same house.
.....................................................................

*****

Thank you for your thoughtful analysis, Leo, and sharing that perspective from the “unwitting beard.”

Cheating is never ideal. I do agree, Leo, that with relationship rights for all, situations like these would be less likely to happen.

I’ve heard from people who’ve been cheated on because their spouse has entered into additional bonds with at least one close relative. I’ve heard from many more people who are the person cheating with at least one close relative.

I welcome the perspectives from all of them because the more we understand what’s happening and why, the better.

We need to ensure laws and larger society affirm that people will have diverse relationships, and that also includes ending relationships or not entering into sexual or romantic or partner relationships at all. Oppression, discrimination, bigotry, prejudice, bullying, criminalization… trying to force everyone into some narrow, heterosexual, monogamous, intraracial (that’s same race), non-consanguineous construct causes all sorts of problems.

For anyone who needs to talk more about these things, Keith can be reached on Wire messaging at fullmarriageequality and via email at fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com.

NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #2

“It goes against tradition.” So did the abolition of slavery. In reality, (adult) intergenerational, interracial marriages, same-gender marriages, polygamous or polyamorous marriages, and consanguineous marriages are nothing new. Some of these were entered into by prominent religious leaders and historical royalty. Regardless, a tradition of inequality is not a justification for continuing to deny equality.

There is no good reason to deny an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion, 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.

Feel free to share, copy and paste, and otherwise distribute. This has been adapted from this page at Full Marriage Equality: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #1

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #3 

Answering Arguments Against Polyamory

People who insist monogamy is the only acceptable relationship model, or that polyamorists should not have the same rights for their relationships as monogamists, almost always cite a few often-repeated reasons as to why. If you're polyamorous, you’ve probably heard most of these reasons, whether from coworkers, family, or complete strangers. Although I’m going to focus on polyamorous relationships, most of these are also applicable to open relationships, swinging, swapping, nonmonogamous sex, and ethical nonmonogamy in general whether the people involved identify as polyamorous or not.

Just about any objection people have to polyamory or other forms of ethical nonmonogamy fit into these common arguments, perhaps with different wording. Just so that you know, when I use the term “polygamy” I am referring to a subset of polyamory that involves marriage (whether by law, ceremony, or declaration of those involved), involving three or more spouses, whatever the structure of the relationship or the genders involved, as long as all involved are consenting adults.

1. “It is disgusting.” Also known as the “ick” or “eww” factor, this explains why the person using the argument would not want to have a polyamorous relationship, but their own personal disgust is not a justification for preventing other people from having a polyamorous relationship. Some people are disgusted by the idea of heterosexual sex, or their own parents having sex, but obviously this is not a justification to ban those things. Obviously, the consenting adults who want a polyamorous relationship aren’t disgusted by it. An effective response to this is “Don’t want a polyamorous relationship? Don’t have one.”

Spirit Day 2025

Thursday, October 16 is Spirit Day. Among varying activities, people wear purple in support of LGBTQ+ youth, against bullying.

Nobody should be bullied, harassed, or discriminated against because of their gender, sexuality, or relationship diversities or those of their family members or friends.

Are you observing Spirit Day? Leave a comment below telling us about it.

Defend people against prejudice, bullying, harassment, and discrimination. You can make a difference!

How You Can Help

NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #1

“It is disgusting.” Also known as the “ick” or “eww” factor, this explains why the person using the argument would not want to enter into the type of relationship or marriage or have the kind sex they want banned, but their own personal disgust is not a justification for preventing other people from doing something those other people want to do. Don’t want to have an (adult) intergenerational or interracial or same-gender or polyamorous or consanguineous marriage? Don’t have one. Some people are disgusted by the idea of heterosexual sex, or their parents having sex, but obviously this is not a justification to ban those things. Some people find prejudice and bigotry, a lack of marriage equality, disgusting. Meanwhile, the people in these relationships aren’t disgusted. How they love each other should be be up to them.

There is no good reason to deny an adult, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion, 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.

Feel free to share, copy and paste, and otherwise distribute. This has been adapted from this page at Full Marriage Equality: http://marriage-equality.blogspot.com/p/discredited-invalid-arguments.html

Go to NOT a Good Reason to Deny Love #2

Coming Out Day 2025 is Saturday

Life can be tough for someone whose identity and orientation doesn’t fit in to a narrow little heterosexual, monogamous, "traditional"-gender-role box or whose relationship doesn’t meet the local sex police’s approved standards. Sometimes, a person or the people in a relationship want to come out of the closet. Sometimes they need to come out. For some of these people, it is a little less difficult if they do so as part of a communal event, such as National Coming Out Day.

National Coming Out Day is Saturday, October 11. Here’s the official website, at least for the US. There is much helpful information there, regardless of where you live.

The more people that come out, the more the others around them will realize they do know and appreciate people who are LGBTQ+, or polyamorous or otherwise nonmonogamous, or consanguinamorous, and that such people and relationships deserve equality. So coming out helps progress.

On the other hand, it is understandable that any given person, couple, triad, or quad decides to stay in the closet for now. There’s still so much hate, so much prejudice and persecution, and even unjust laws that hinder the life and love of people who are good citizens and just want to be themselves. I support the decision of anyone who believes they need to be reserved for now for the sake of their safety and family.

The decision to come out is yours. Do you want to come out, and to whom? Your friends? Your family? Your coworkers? Your classmates? Your neighbors? Your crush? The whole world?

Also, if someone comes out to you, the decision to be an ally is yours. If your classmate, coworker, neighbor, friend, parent, child, or sibling comes to you and says they are gay, lesbian, bisexual, polysexual, pansexual, transgender, non-binary, genderfluid, polyamorous, nonmonogamous, consanguinamorous or in a consanguinamorous relationship, what will you do? Will you choose love and acceptance?

Even if you are heterosexual, monogamous, and nonconsanguinamorous, you may want to come out as an ally for full marriage equality. That alone can take courage, but it helps.

If you are planning to come out, or you do come out, please feel free to share your experience here by commenting. You can do so anonymously. You are also welcome to contact Keith if you want someone to talk with. The best ways to do that are to email fullmarriageequality at protonmail dot com or message fullmarriageequality on the Wire messaging app.