(Perspective: Lilith)
This is yet another extremely long response to the ignorant comments posted in response to Jenny Block's article tackling the Tiger Wood's scandal. Sigh... I couldn't help myself, so I went overboard and turned my little comment into a passion driven rant.
Here is the link to the article: Jenny Block
Being an individual that practices Polyamory in my personal life, I can agree with many statements that Jenny Block makes, conversely there are many statements Jenny Block makes that I do not agree with.
First and foremost, I do notice that Jenny Block focuses mainly on the sexual aspect of polyamory. While sexuality is an important part of all relationships, I do not appreciate how sexuality has been the main topic concerning Polyamory.
Polyamory is a simple word used to describe a complex personal philosophy.
Poly is also a hybrid word from Greek and Latin; Poly (Greek) translates to 'many' or 'multiple' and Amor (Latin) translates to 'love'.
Polyamory means many loves.
While individuals are free to interpret that translation how they will, I still believe that 'many loves' still means just that 'many loves', which does not mean 'many fuck buddies' or 'many one night stands'.
Swinging and Polyamory will forever be on the opposite ends of the spectrum and should not be confused with one another, especially with the media distorting the personal philosophy in order to create petty cultural wars amongst one another.
Jenny Block's story of how she became Polyamorous is her story and while it may reflect similar situations of how some other individuals became Polyamorous, it does not reflect us all.
My Fiance and I have never cheated on one another, nor have we cheated on partners in our past, because not only do we have self control as individuals, but we also have morals and ethics that clearly make actions such as lying, cheating, stealing (and so on), not only wrong, but irreversible actions that have many consequences causing unimaginable damage.
Our story of how we became Polyamorous has absolutely nothing to do with lying, cheating, or a lack of self control. We both as individuals are caring, loving, compassionate, empathetic, and extroverted, with many evolving interests regarding human nature, society, and culture. We have a lot of love to give and make the conscious decision to choose to see the good and loveable qualities in humans instead of simply focusing on the bad and unlovable qualities in humans. This makes it very easy to develop legitimate feelings for more than one individual at a time and these feelings can range anywhere from crushes to being in love.
Humans, as a race, have throughout time, isolated themselves further and further from one another, which goes against the nature of our species. We are social creatures that not only statistically, but also logically live happier, healthier, longer, and less complicated lives when we interact with, depend on, and trust one another.
If this weren't the case, then we as a species would not be trying to fix the hole in our hearts and the empty void in our lives by joining special interest groups or on-line social networks to replace feelings belonging, acceptance, and love.
Humans have put themselves through hell over the course of thousands of years and we have finally reached our apex, which has resulted in an overwhelming feeling of needing to experience love.
I have read the statement that monogamy is a myth.
I have read the statement that monogamy goes against our nature as a species.
I strongly disagree with them both.
What I do believe is that monogamy and polyamory are both legitimate lifestyles, in sync with our nature, for some of us are happy being monogamous and some of us are happy being polyamorous.
Yes, emotions such as jealousy are completely natural, but only because we are sentient creatures capable of experiencing a wide range of emotions and thought. However, this does not mean that just because you might experience something uncomfortable, you should avoid it or deem the source of your discomfort as unnatural or something that goes against the nature of your species. It is how you choose to react to your uncomfortable emotions that is important, not whether or not you experience them.
Humans are also creatures of passion; various cultures have created music, dances, paintings, jewelry, clothing, stories, belief systems so they can feel unique depths emotions that are a direct result of experiencing those diverse creations.
Dancing is different from music just as jewelry is different from clothing, but they are each enjoyable for their unique aspects, which is why we enjoy all of them instead of confining ourselves to one form of artistic expression.
The same can be said for human interaction and human relationships.
Just as it isn't okay to be monogamous because the prying eyes of society says you should, it isn't okay to be polyamorous because the prying eyes of society says you should.
We all have our personal beliefs and our personal convictions. To claim our personal beliefs and our personal convictions are the one and only right way to live is a bit absurd because along with that claim comes the implication that we are perfect, all knowing, and god-like.
Face it, we are all far from perfect, all knowing, and god-like.
This is why persecuting each other for our beliefs is absolutely ridiculous.
We live in 2009, not the 1930's.
Which brings me to my other point.
I have read statements that suggest allowing homosexual couples the right to be recognized by the state as a legitimate couple with the same right to marry as heterosexual couples will result in the scenario in which polyamorous couples will be recognized by the state as a legitimate couple with the same right to marry as monogamous couples, which will create a slippery slope.
First, the issue against homosexual rights is absurd.
The only people with an issue against homosexuals are Christians.
Homosexuality has been documented as being practiced a good 35,000 to 50,000 years ago, which when compared to the 2,000 year old practice of Christianity, it is ancient. I understand the Bible claims that homosexuality is wrong “because God says so”, but the Bible is a violent book dating back 2,000 years, which was literally published by a government body that decided which books were and weren't allowed in the Bible.
Jesus, who is the figure of Christianity, states that judging your fellow humans is not your right and tells humans that you are not to pass judgment or persecute for what you perceive as the sins of others. You are, by his words, to leave that to God.
If you believe your religion as you so zealously claim, please follow all of it, not just what suits you .
If you demand respect for your beliefs and convictions, then give respect to the beliefs and convictions of others, especially when they do not pertain to yours.
That is intelligence.
Second, the Church and State are supposed to be separate, meaning that if the only individuals that are opposed to homosexual marriages are the religious, then by law, the religious are to have no say in the decisions of government institutions.
Third, claiming that homosexual and polyamorous rights will create a slippery slope is as backwards as claiming that allowing women and African-Americans the right to vote will create a slippery slope.
I invite you to remember a time where women were forced into submission without even the right to common civil liberties such as wearing pants.
I invite you to remember a time where African-Americans were bought and sold into slavery, raped, murdered, and denied all human rights because the color of their skin.
From our perspective at this point in time, we view those periods as horrible points in human history, and as a sober example of the maliciousness humans are capable of.
We cannot repeat those mistakes.
Is it so difficult to imagine a time in which we do not judge what causes us no physical harm?
Is it so difficult to imagine a time in which homosexual and polyamorous individuals have the same rights and civil liberties as do women and African-American individuals?
If we as a species are so intelligent and progressive, why is it that we cannot evolve past petty judgments? It's quite embarrassing, to be honest.
I have seen family become a major concern of those curious about the Polyamorous lifestyle.
Many of you have asked about the stability of the children who belong to Polyamorous families.
Children without siblings are scientifically proven to psychologically develop differently from children with at least one sibling; children without siblings are scientifically proven to have difficulty with social skills, sharing, and learning abilities whereas children with siblings are scientifically proven to have more ease with social skills, sharing, and learning abilities.
Children without parents are scientifically proven to emotionally develop differently from children with at least one parent.
As you see, children who are surrounded by larger families, which are comprised of loving and supportive pillars of strength, live happier, healthier, and more stable lives and are much more capable of becoming stable adults in their future.
Polyamory means many loves, which one could imagine implies larger families in the sense that existing families merge, which results in extended families that can be seen as support groups.
This not only makes it easier and more enjoyable for the child to have more brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, fathers, and mothers to turn to, but it makes it easier for the parents as well to know that they will have help caring, loving, and providing for their children.
I quote: “It takes a village to raise a child.”
This has never been more true as we our now seeing the consequences of trying to raise children alone.
As a conclusion to this very long response: the main arguments against Polyamory can be seen as stemming from a few nerves that are touched by the concept such as sexuality, family, religion.
If we can open our minds to the possibility that polyamory is about the ability to love more than one individual and not about the allowance of cheating, that polyamory is about creating families and not about destroying families, and that those who practice religion should be more tolerant, accepting, and loving towards the personal decisions that do not cause them any physical harm, then perhaps we can as a society open our minds to if not practicing Polyamory, then at least accepting and loving those who do.
For those who feel that Polyamory is being shoved in your face because there exist news articles, books, and documentaries regarding the subject, please understand that we are simply offering our opinion just like every other member of society is doing.
Polyamory is not for everyone, and that is okay.
Monogamy is not for everyone, and that is okay.
To address the Tiger Woods situation: Cheating is not okay within Monogamous and/or Polyamorous relationships, because to cheat is to lie, deceive, and posses a lack of self-control as well as necessary morals and ethics. I do not think that Tiger Woods becoming Polyamorous would solve any of his problems, because within Polyamorous relationships communication, honesty, and respect are key components, and when those guidelines are disrespected and breached, relationships end just as they do in Monogamous relationships. It appears that Tiger Woods doesn't necessarily feel as though he doesn't have an option, but rather that he has an issue with lying and cheating, which we shouldn't forget that some people have, whether or not they are Polyamorous or Monogamous.
So, before any one you angrily responds to my comment with spiteful and hate filled remarks, please seriously consider the words I have written, and open your minds to the possibility that it is okay for people to be different from you as long as what they are doing causes you no harm.
Humans are wonderful creatures when we choose to be, so let us choose to use the intelligence we pride ourselves on, and continue down another path of evolution.
Update: I highly respect Jenny Block for her commitment to putting herself in a vulnerable position for the sake of Poly Activism, but she isn't exactly the best poster child for the Poly Movement.
