New and Interactive Work of Fiction on Polyamory

Lauren Soldano at oaklandlocal.com shares about journalist Laird Harrison and his interesting new work of fiction, Fallen Lake.

But the book — which tells the story of two couples who decide to pursue their love for each other through a group marriage — isn’t neatly contained on the printed page. Readers can interact with present-day versions of the characters in real time through a blog on "Fallen Lake’s" website.

Great idea.

"Fallen Lake" is based on years of research and interviews with polyamorous couples and their families, as well online forum and book-based research. In fact, although the book is fiction, Harrison’s own parents lived for two years as part of a group marriage household.

Published on Valentine’s Day by Verdant Books, a small Vermont-based publishing house, "Fallen Lake" originally contained two narratives — one taking place in modern day and another in the 1970s. While the printed novel tells the historical story, the blog (which launched on the same day as the book’s release) will gradually unfold the present-day narrative, which can be altered by comments from readers.

I like the concept, and I like the subject matter. It would be good to see more fiction on polyamory and group marriage by good writers, and more notice of the topics in the news.

Put Down the Cookie Cutter

Lisa Evans asks at blogher.com, “Monogamy: the Ultimate Form of Love or a Restraint on Your Freedom?”

She was inspired by a conversation with a friend…

Essentially, my opinion was that if you do not naturally want to be monogamous to your significant other, then you are not with the right person. Her side was that no one person can fulfill all the needs of another. I did agree with this point, however, I consider that statement to be limited to things other than intimacy such as friendships and other forms of platonic relationships.

For some, monogamy is required.
For some, polyamory or some form of nonmonogamy is required.
Some people could be happy in a monogamous relationship, polyamorous, or open relationship.

But for all of those, people need to be in those relationships with the people who are right to share those relationships with them.

Some people aren’t in a place in their life to be in any relationship.

No one way is right for everyone. This is why we should let consenting adults form and keep the relationships they decide are for them, with any consenting adults. If they want to share friendship, sex, love, residence, marriage… any or all of those things… that should be up to them, and they should be able to do so without prosecution, persecution, or discrimination.

Solidarity For Full Marriage Equality

At prolongedeyecontact.tumblr.com I was pointed to “Why We Should All Be Against ‘Gay Marriage’” at gaywrites.org, while prolongedeyecontact.tumblr.com was getting it from f---yeahsexeducation.tumblr.com. Got that?

For a while, we referred to the overall political topic of people of the same sex getting married as “gay marriage.” But that’s never been right. Why? Because marriage is marriage. Whether two people who enter into a marriage are the same gender or not, it’s still a marriage under the law, and we don’t need to distinguish between those that are “gay” or not.

I like to say the same-sex or the "0same-gender freedom to marry," because that is what we're talking about.

Prolonged Eye Contact (I think... maybe someone else deserves the credit) calls for solidarity...

Ya’know I used to be taken in by this “marriage equality” rhetoric, but then I really sat back and thought about it. It’s not marriage equality that the cLGB are fighting for at all. Every time bigoted heterosexual politicians say we can’t have “gay marriage” because it will lead the way to polygamy, pedophilia, and bestiality activists are more than willing to take the bait and throw poly people in with pedophiles and animal abusers. And where exactly does that leave queer poly people [like me]? Exactly. They don’t care about marriage equality, they care about assimilation. Until they care about all people in consensual, adult relationships having the right to marry, until they stop acting like group marriage is an abomination on par with abuse, they are not really fighting for equality.

There are monogamous LGBT people who do support full marriage equality, and they should be thanked for their solidarity by polyamorous and consanguinamorous people, just as anyone who throws other consenting adults under the bus should be called out. At the same time, poly and consanguinamorous people should be supporting LGBT rights even if they are heterosexual.

Vivienne Chen writes at equalwrites.org, "Why We Need a More Inclusive LGBTQ Movement."

A Strong Plank

Did you pick the Oscar winners? Were you able to vote as a member of the Academy? The big night is over for another year. That allows for more attention to turn to another voting matter; the US election for President.

At Upper Left, Shaun also supports the proposed plank in the US Democratic Party platform...

The Democratic Party supports the full inclusion of all families in the life of our nation, with equal respect, responsibility, and protection under the law, including the freedom to marry. Government has no business putting barriers in the path of people seeking to care for their family members, particularly in challenging economic times. We support the Respect for Marriage Act and the overturning of the federal so-called “Defense of Marriage Act,” and oppose discriminatory constitutional amendments and other attempts to deny the freedom to marry to loving and committed same-sex couples.

As Shaun said...

I do, and my Party should.

I do, too. An adult should be free to marry any consenting adults. Full inclusion of all families is a must. Tear down the barriers of bigotry.

Whatever party, if any, you have joined, work to get the party on board with full marriage equality. Be on the right side of history.

I do. Do you?

Taking a Swing Through Austin, Texas

Hump Day is The Daily Texan's weekly sex and sexuality column. In this edition, they covered swinging in Austin, Texas.

Not to be confused with polyamory, which is when a person practices both sexual and emotional relationships with multiple people, swingers are usually couples looking to have sexual relations with other couples or with other single parties. Some couples will keep swinging with their same partners multiple times, while other couples will choose different partners each time they swing for different experiences.

That's a pretty good explanation.

The methods that couples use to find their other partners differs within swinging culture. Craigslist, although very direct, can be fruitless when people replying to listings may not may not be as be physically stunning as they advertised. A more personal and natural way of exploring swinging choices is to go to either a swingers club or a house party.


Clubs tend to be more open to new members, but house parties require an invitation. There are also membership fees for clubs and the atmosphere in clubs and house parties tend to differ.

The article has some explanation and advice for swinging that is applicable to many other places. Silly laws often impose some restrictions in some places, like barring certain sex acts (like anything involving genitalia) at the clubs, so officially the clubs in those places are limited to being meet-up/conversation facilities. Swinging definitely isn't for everyone, but some people enjoy it, and consenting adults should not be restricted by the hangups, tastes, and prejudices of people who are not even there.

Just In Case You're Still in Kansas, or Moving There

Some questions and answers on Kansas marriage law were printed recently in The Emporia Gazett. The answers are from Emporia attorney Tom Kruege. Unfortunately, many states have laws very much like Kansas.

This disclaimer preceded the Q & A...

DISCLAIMER: The information that you obtain regarding your inquiry is not nor is intended to be legal advice. You should consult an attorney for legal advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting me through this site does not constitute an attorney/client relationship nor do my responses constitute a legal opinion.

Now, on to just how restricted the freedom to marry is in Kansas...

Major Movie With Polyamory Getting Mixed Reviews

You may have seen the ads for "Wanderlust," starring Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd, and noticed that there is polyamory in the movie.

At vancouversun.com, the headline reads "Cliché-ridden comedy is a bad trip, man."

Couple trade life in the Big Apple for stereotyped commune in mean-spirited story

Hmm.

Imagine Martha Marcy May Marlene with a laugh track, or Jonestown with a jukebox playing the music from The Big Chill, and you get a good sense of the creepy edge on Wanderlust.

Eh...

At nydailynews.com, the headline is "Jennifer Aniston and Paul Rudd’s ‘Wanderlust’ is all over the place, but going nowhere."

Despite the calculated advance press about the movie's nudity, polygamy, dirty talk, etc., David Wain’s comedy is depressingly banal. And all that breathless hype now feels like nothing more than manipulation.

Someday, it won't be shocking to see a positive, realistic portrayal of polyamory in a top big-studio movie. If you see this movie, let me know what you think of how the polyamorists are portrayed.

Woman Sentenced For Consensual Sex in Nova Scotia

Completing an absurd case, a Canadian woman has been criminally sentenced for having consensual sex.

A 27-year-old Amherst woman was sentenced Tuesday in Amherst provincial court to a suspended sentence, 24 months probation and a five-year weapons prohibition after pleading guilty Nov. 9 to incest by having sexual intercourse with her brother.

Why? What public good does it serve to have prosecuted and sentenced her?

The 20-year-old brother was sentenced Dec. 6, and received probation for 24 months, and a 10-year weapons prohibition after pleading guilty to having sexual intercourse with a person, knowing the person was his sister.

Look at that. He was younger and yet he got the harsher sentence. Why? And since they were both prosecuted, who was the victim?

He was also sentenced to a suspended sentence with probation for 24 months after pleading guilty to committing assault on the sister involved in the incest incident.

As I wrote before, assault is the crime that should have been the focus of the prosecution.

An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults, without prosecution, persecution, or discrimination. If these siblings want to have sex or get married, that should be their choice and not a criminal matter. How embarrassing for Canadians that their government wastes resources on things like this. As an American, I get embarrassed when prosecutions like this happen in the US. These prosecutions are inconsistent vestiges of a dead, sex-negative past. This woman can legally marry a virtual stranger and can legally have anonymous sex with ten strangers in one night. That should remain her right, but she should also have the right to have sex with or marry her sibling, who is a consenting adult.

Not All Polyamorous Relationships Are Open Relationships

Note to journalists, especially editors:

Not all polyamorous relationships are open relationships. The terms should not be used as synonyms.

Polyamory means there are more than two people involved, with the informed consent of all. The most simple form is a "V" in which one person has two lovers (girlfriends, boyfriends, spouses, whatever) who only have that person as a lover... not each other, not anyone else. This would not be an open relationship. This would be a closed relationship.

An open relationship means one, both, or all people involved, by agreement, have an ongoing relationship but are open to dates or ongoing relationships with others (whether or not the other person(s) in the existing relationship are involved in that process.)

There are a wide variety of polyamorous relationships. Some are open, some are not. There are many polyamorous people who have never been swingers and have never swapped. Some poly people are boring, good neighbors who raise kids and are good citizens active in their local communities and look suspiciously like soccer moms and dedicated dads (as some swingers and swappers are, too.) Because they are.

Being more precise in terminology is especially important given the prejudices and myths that poly people deal with from ignorant or hostile people.

Unjustly Convicted or Getting What He Deserves?

From Montana comes this report, “Jury convicts Helena man on incest charge,” which is scant with relevant details. The Independent Record has a few skips in it. (You young’uns might not get that reference.)

A Helena man was convicted late Thursday in District Court of incest Thursday evening.

Once again, we must note that “incest” can mean rape, including rape of a minor, or consensual sex with an adult. Those are two very different things. Which was it? We aren’t told. Since he wasn’t convicted of sexual assault, isn’t that an indication that this was consensual?

Randy Bill Ring, 57, is already serving a two-year federal prison sentence for possessing 11 guns after being prohibited to do so following a forgery conviction in Powell County in 2008.

The man is no stranger to the law. Still, unjust laws are unjust regardless to whom they are applied.

In the incest case, prosecutors said Ring gave alcohol to a family member in February 2010 and had intercourse with her.

“Had intercourse with” doesn’t sound like assault. “Gave alcohol” is also vague. If she didn’t know she was drinking alcohol, or was under the age of 21 (or 18… I’m not going to bother to look up the drinking laws in Montana,) wouldn’t he have been charged with those crimes? And how much alcohol did she actually consume? I know some are of the belief that any amount of alcohol consumption on the part of a woman means that any male who subsequently has sex with her is guilty of assault, but I don’t buy that. (Perhaps if you do, we should close down all bars.) The article doesn’t say she was inebriated.

He could face 100 years in prison for the crime.

District Judge James Reynolds set a sentencing hearing for April 5.

I sure hope this isn’t another case of someone being prosecuted and convicted for consensual sex. It is outrageous that someone could be sentenced to 100 years in prison for that. An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults without prosecution. If this was a matter of a sexual assault, the language of the article and the charges should have reflected that.

It is too bad we don’t have more information.

You do know that if you serve on a jury and you do not think the laws applied are just, you have the ability to acquit the defendant, right?

Allies For the Consanguinamorous

Rachel wrote  "Sunday School: On Kissing Cousins" at queereka.com, and I want to thank her for the link to this blog, but even more for showing solidarity for the consanguinamorous.

Also, thanks to the person "C" who asked Rachel this...

Lately I’ve read advocacy for *full* marriage equality, including for close relatives (consanguineous relationships). The only reasonable objections I’ve ever heard have to do with the increased risk of disorders and immunodeficiency. However, I’m not versed in the scientific / medical literature, and unless the risk is extreme it seems more appropriate to educate rather than stigmatize (as with teen pregnancy).

So, what should we bear in mind about consanguinamory? Where can we find reliable information (esp. for our large and geographically mobile population)? What should we learn before becoming consanguineous allies?

From the response...

“Essentially, yes, there is a certain amount of risk in consanguineous breeding,” answered Leslie Kendall, a graduate researcher in genetics at Texas A&M University. “Genetic testing can mitigate some of this as far as well established genetic disorders, but you have to remember that not everything is testable, so even if these parents had clear tests, there is the possibility of something popping up (a greater chance than from non-consanguineous breeding). It depends solely upon what they are bringing to the party.” For a more thorough entry-level explanation, she recommends this very illuminating 2003 Discover article.

Given that cousin marriage is pretty widespread and has been through the majority of human history, and that as a species we seem to have done just fine–albeit with some pretty high-profile outlying exceptions, like the Tsarevich Alexei–rejecting it on a biological basis is illogical. Even an isolated close-relative coupling (half-siblings or closer, as expressed by a mathematical coefficient of inbreeding F) within an otherwise robustly branched family tree is unlikely to have serious deleterious effects, so long as the partners aren’t carriers for a marquee genetic disorder like hemophilia or Tay-Sachs, both of which are testable.

So, Discredited Argument #18 isn't strong, but is likely a cover for DA #2...

Cultural stigmas surrounding incest, however, can’t really be =dismissed with straightforward math in the same way. Ultimately I believe that consenting adults have a right to whatever bedroom activities tickle their individual fancies, so long as they exercise some minimum amount of due diligence to ensure that nobody’s getting hurt in a way they didn’t ask for. Healthy, satisfying relationships between individual persons are good for all of us in aggregate. If a couple experiences genetic sexual attraction, for example, there is no rational reason to treat them differently than any other couple.

Thank you!

In a fairly stunning coincidence, while I was working on this column, Dear Prudence on Slate ran a letter from half of a consensually incestuous gay couple that basically said exactly what I would have said, except better. I definitely would refer readers to Emily Yoffe’s answer. She appears to be a pretty good model for consanguineous allies!

Yes, I looked at that one in this posting. Thanks to the people leaving comments at slate.com who've linked to this blog.

There were comments after Rachel's answer.

Hungary May Become Slightly Less Oppressive

The national penal code of Hungary is getting tweaked.

And that only brings us through the letter “I”, as in “incest” – which, oddly, is now about to become less illegal.

While tightening the screws on drugs, the new draft penal code will loosen the strings on vérfertőzés. According to Index, the government thought that the current penalty – one to five years in prison – is “excessive” compared to “international practices” as well as the punishment meted out for other crimes. As a result, the most you can get for incest is three years, while sex involving siblings (including twins!) will only cost two years’ max.

The government’s new pro-incest policy could be seen as clashing with its new anti-drug policy, which according to state newswire MTI seeks to “help the physical and mental development of young people, as well as to strengthen families and utilize the power of communities.” That said, if there are really not going to be any drugs available from now on, we’re certainly willing to give it a try.

I realize that this is supposed to be humorous (and, unfortunately, it is okay in some circles to express prejudiced humor towards some lovers), but I would hardly call keeping prison terms for consanguinamory to be "pro-incest. People in consanguinamorous relationships should consider moving. Nobody should be sent to prison for how they love another consenting adult. An adult should be free to share love, sex, residence, and marriage with any consenting adults.