# data[].attributes.body
Youtube lecture

# data[].attributes.headline
Androphilia and gynephilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

# data[].attributes.subject
Androphilia and gynephilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Androphilia and gynephilia are terms used in behavioral science to describe sexual orientation, as an alternative to a gender binary homosexual and heterosexual conceptualization. Androphilia describes sexual attraction to men or masculinity; gynephilia describes the sexual attraction to women or femininity. Ambiphilia describes the combination of both androphilia and gynephilia in a given individual, or bisexuality.

# data[].attributes.headline
re: Gender-neutral Words for Sexual Dispositions - Page 4 - Thinker's Lounge Forum - Neoseeker Forums

# data[].attributes.subject
re: Gender-neutral Words for Sexual Dispositions - Page 4 - Thinker's Lounge Forum - Neoseeker Forums

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender-neutral Words for Sexual Dispositions - Thinker's Lounge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have noticed that having a sexual attraction to mainly women and having sexual attractions to mainly men do not have their

# data[].attributes.headline
Bisexuality and Polyamory Myths and Realities - Bluetruth

# data[].attributes.subject
Bisexuality and Polyamory Myths and Realities - Bluetruth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From Bluetruth

by Alexis Hazell

[ Editor's note: This essay was derived from talks given at Deakin University and Monash University in 2004, and was originally published online on the bi.org.au Web site; it is republished here with some minor editorial changes. ]

Bisexuality and polyamory are two forms of non-heteronormative behaviour that are commonly surrounded by misunderstandings, myths, and outright misrepresentations. However, although one of those myths is that bisexuality necessarily involves polyamory, it also often seems to be the case that bisexuals are particularly well-represented in the polyamorous communities. A survey by Loving More Magazine in 2002 found that over 50% of those practicing polyamorists willing to state a sexual identity identified as bisexual. [1] Given this apparent significant overlap between the bisexual and polyamorous communities, issues that affect one community can also tend to impact the other; and it is thus important to keep both communities in mind when discussing such issues. Thus, in this essay, we consider the myths and realities of bisexuality and polyamory together.

So, to begin with: What is a 'bisexual'? Is it people who identify as bisexual? Or is it people who exhibit bisexual behaviour? And if it's the latter, what constitutes 'bisexual' behaviour"?

Rebecca Kaplan, in her essay "Your fence is sitting on me", noted that:

[M]any people read some small excerpt from Kinsey [i.e. the publications Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male and Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female both by Alfred C. Kinsey, published in 1948 and 1953, respectively], collapse together all the people on one side of some arbitrarily chosen point on the scale, call all people on one side 'gay' and call all people on the other side 'straight.' In fact, it is this reading which gave rise to the oft-cited 10 percent figure. By collapsing together all people at 5 or above on the Kinsey scale, some activists calculated that 10 percent of adult Euro-American males (Kinsey's population under study) are 'gay.' [2]

Further, the summary of the results of the Australian Study of Health and Relationships states that, of the more than 14,000 people who responded to the survey,

97.4% of men identified as heterosexual, 1.6% as gay and 0.9% as bisexual. For women 97.7% identified as heterosexual, 0.8% as gay and 1.4% bisexual. Nevertheless, 8.6% of men and 15.1% of women reported either feelings of attraction to the same sex or some sexual experience with the same sex. Half the men and two thirds of the women who had same sex sexual experience regarded themselves as heterosexual rather than homosexual. This illustrates that same sex attraction and experience are more common in Australia [than] is indicated by the relatively few people reporting a homosexual or bisexual identity. [3]

So on a purely behavioural basis, there are actually more bisexuals than gays and lesbians combined!

At this point, I'd like to make it clear that I'm definitely not trying to say that people who are behaviourally bisexual but don't identify as such are "really" bisexual. Instead, I'm trying to rebut the notion that bisexuality doesn't really exist, that people are either heterosexual or homosexual. Personally, I'm comfortable with people of a wide variety of sexual orientations calling themselves "bisexual"; and I'm also comfortable with people who are behaviourally bisexual calling themselves 'lesbian', 'gay' or 'straight'. I do, however, think it is important to recognise that bisexuality in a behavioural sense tends to be hidden in such situations.

Another difficulty in trying to define 'bisexuality' is the recent re-appearance of the "bisexual chic" fad. In an article for the Bi-Victoria newsletter, I wrote that:

It's difficult to find a piece of writing in the mainstream press which mentions the word 'bisexual' without finding that it is immediately followed by the word 'chic'. The impression I get, however, is that it is only "chic" when there are Hot Bi Babes involved (a term which is often used ironically by members of the polyamorous community to describe what many - if not most - straight men are really interested in when they say they're interested in polyamory). In other words, it seems to me that it's only "chic" when the bisexuality in question is that of women, rather than men. And in any event, the point of such "chic" seems to be more about titillating straight males than about women exploring their sexuality.

Indeed, the word 'bisexual' itself is apparently becoming increasingly used to refer only to women; and then only (or at least mainly) in a sexual sense. That is, a "bisexual" is a woman who interacts sexually with both men and women. (The possibility of women interacting with women in other intimate, but non-sexual ways, doesn't seem to be discussed.) This notion is based on two observations:

people in the swing scene who only discuss bisexuality as a phenomenon occurring amongst women, and who seem startled at the prospect of bisexuality amongst men. Not that there is a rejection of the possibility: they just don't really seem to have considered it.

a lack, as far as I can tell, of mainstream discussions of bisexuality which spend much time discussing male/male interaction. In fact, where bisexual men are referenced, it is predominantly in a context in which their bisexual behaviour or identity is represented as problematic: for example, in articles about women who have to cope with their male partner being bisexual, or about women who have discovered that their husband has been cheating on them with another man, or about women whose lives were turned upside-down when their male partner revealed that he had contracted HIV as a result of an unsafe sex session at a male sauna. So bisexuality amongst women is "chic"; bisexuality amongst men is destructive and probably also a leading cause of tooth-decay.

Why, however, do people who are behaviourally bisexual not identify as bisexual? There are any number of valid reasons: they may feel that bisexuality has to involve romantic attraction, in addition to physical attraction; they may not want to be associated with any of the negative connotations which our society often ascribes to bisexuals; they may not want to accept a label that places them in a minority group; they may simply feel that the label doesn't accurately describe their sexuality; or they may reject such labels altogether.

At this point, I'd like to elaborate a little on the negative connotations of bisexuality, by taking a brief look at some examples of bisexuality in the mass media.

Take, for example, the character of Willow, from the television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The scriptwriters had an opportunity to show Willow exploring whether or not she was bisexual, and whether or not she actually wanted to be in a relationship with Tara as well as with Oz. Especially after Oz returns; Willow realises that she still has feelings for Oz, but dismisses the whole issue by noting that she's 'gay' now. Huh? So what was all that lovey-dovey stuff with Oz? Why was she so worked up when Oz left to control his werewolfishness? That doesn't sound like the behaviour of someone who's not interested in guys.

Further, the television series The L Word has, I believe, offered us a common characterisation of bisexuals: someone who follows the show told me that one female character:

Cheated on her fiance with [a] woman, got caught out, [apologised] in front of lover and queer grrl crowd, and begged him to take her back, had quickie wedding and then he ditched her. [4]

Having said that, I'm also told that this character is not necessarily bisexual; she may be bi-curious. Further, there is apparently another female character who actively identifies as bisexual and who is accepted by a group of lesbians, which sounds rather more positive.

Another positive representation of bisexual people appears in the British TV series The Bill, which features a bi character who, I am told, has stated that she does not cheat or knowingly enter into relationships with people who are cheating on their partners.

On the other hand, Channel Nine's series Stingers includes a character named Chris Dichiera who (in the show) has slept with both men and women - leading the show's other characters to ask something like "Why is she sleeping with a guy - isn't she a dyke?" That she might be bisexual doesn't seem to have been considered.

Such characterisations can create psychological stresses for many bisexual people as we constantly struggle against such (often negative) stereotypes. Bisexuals also face other challenges to their mental well-being:

We are often described as "really gay" by straight people and "really straight" by gays and lesbians.

Following on from that, we are often described as "sitting on the fence", "refusing to choose", or "in transition [i.e. between being straight and lesbian or gay]", and that it is "just a phase" on our way to becoming "fully gay", "fully lesbian" or "fully straight". That may be true for a number of people, but I believe it's wrong to characterise every bisexual in such a manner. One might as well say that someone who likes both meat and vegetables is just in transition between being a vegetarian and being a carnivore.

Certain sections of the gay and lesbian community say that we are "hiding behind the protective wall of heterosexual privilege". Well, as a member of Bi-Victoria has remarked, when he was younger, people didn't ask if he was gay or bi before they bashed him. And speaking personally, whilst I've never been the object of physical violence as a result of my bisexuality, I've certainly had to deal with a great deal of verbal abuse which was centred on the fact that I'm not heterosexual.

Bisexuals are often cited as vectors for STIs (Sexually Transmitted Infections), a notion seemingly supported by a recent study published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, which found that "[p]redictors of recent STI or BBV [Blood-Borne Virus] diagnosis in men included homosexual or bisexual identity, a history of sex work as a worker or client, a history of injecting drugs and having more than one partner in the past year. In women, predictors included bisexual identity, history of sex work as a worker, injecting drug use, and having more than one partner in the past year." [5]

However, the fact is that "whether or not a person is at risk for HIV depends on their behavior, not their identity" [6]. For instance, a celibate bisexual is at less risk for STIs than a sexually active heterosexual.

The notion that bisexuals face unique psychological stresses is not merely theoretical. Study results published in the British Journal of Psychiatry in May 2002 actually went to the effort of studying the mental health of gays and bisexuals as two distinct populations, and compared them separately to the heterosexual population. I quote here from the summary:

METHOD: A community survey of 4824 adults was carried out in Canberra, Australia. Measures covered anxiety, depression, suicidality, alcohol misuse, positive and negative affect and a range of risk factors for poorer mental health. RESULTS: The bisexual group was highest on measures of anxiety, depression and negative affect, with the homosexual group falling between the other two groups. Both the bisexual and homosexual groups were high on suicidality. Bisexuals also had more current adverse life events, greater childhood adversity, less positive support from family, more negative support from friends and a higher frequency of financial problems. Homosexuals reported greater childhood adversity and less positive support from family. CONCLUSIONS: The bisexual group had the worst mental health, although homosexual participants also tended to report more distress. [7]

Further, in August 2000 the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board noted that:

It is the Board's experience that discrimination and vilification against people on the ground of their bisexuality is a reality and that this treatment has serious consequences for bisexual people in their public life. In many cases the unfair treatment of bisexual people flows directly from their bisexuality and not from presumed homosexuality. Accordingly the ground of homosexuality is ineffective in addressing discrimination and vilification experienced by bisexual people. [8]

Bisexuality does not necessarily imply polyamory. Many people make the assumption that because bisexuals are attracted to both men and women, that we need one male partner and one female partner to be happy. Whilst I'm sure this is true for some bisexuals, I believe it would be incorrect to say that it is more generally true. For example, someone who likes both redheads and brunettes does not necessarily need to have both a redheaded partner and a brunette partner. However, as noted at the beginning of this essay, it is true that many polyamorous people are indeed bisexual; and it is to the topic of polyamory that I now turn.

In a talk given at the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board's Mardi Gras Forum 2003, Bi Pride Australia co-president Glenn Vassallo described a polyamorous relationship as:

One in which three or more people are sexually and emotionally connected. It is possible that all the people involved may share the same level of connection to each other, or one person may have two or more partners who are not involved with each other. [9]

Polyamory describes a romantic relationship between more than two people; sex may or may not be involved. Polyfidelity is a closed relationship between more than two people; the participants agree that they will not engage in relationships - either emotional or sexual - with people outside the relationship. Nonmonogamy includes both these terms, and also swinging, which is where people allow sexual, but not romantic, relationships.

One thing that needs to be stated clearly is that polyamory is most certainly not cheating. Personally, I have a strong dislike for cheating. I consider "cheating" to be a situation in which one has a romantic and/or sexual relationship with someone other than their partner or partners without their knowledge and consent. My understanding of the word 'polyamory', however, is that it describes ethical nonmonogamy; that a given style of relationship involving multiple partners may only be called 'polyamory' if that relationship is conducted ethically. And I believe that dishonesty - including, in the case of relationships, lying by omission - is fundamentally unethical.

A common response to the concept of polyamory is that it's not "natural", either on religious or biological grounds. And yet the Tanakh - known as the 'Old Testament' in Christian cultures - seems to have no problem with at least some forms of polyamory: in Genesis 4:19, we're told that Lamech had two wives; in Genesis 25:6, we're told that Abraham had concubines; and in 1 Kings 11:3, we're told that Solomon "had seven hundred wives, all princesses, and three hundred concubines".

To those who claim that polyamory is biologically unnatural, I simply ask: Hands up those monogamous people who think they'll never be cheated on by a partner.

In fact, the biological argument seems to have little evidence to support it. The ABS reports that in 2000, there were approximately 49,900 divorces in Australia, with the median duration between marriage and final separation being 8.2 years. In Victoria alone there were approximately 12,400 divorces, with the median duration between marriage and final separation being 8.4 years [10]. A working paper published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies in 1999 entitled Towards understanding the reasons for divorce showed that, of the people surveyed, 22.6% of women and 33.3% of men stated "communication problems" as the main reason for marriage breakdown; whilst 20.3% of women and 19.7% of men stated that the main reason was that they "or former spouse had an affair" [11].

Additionally, the magazine FHM completed an online survey of approximately 25,000 British adults; of those, "56 per cent of men and women admitted to having been unfaithful in a relationship" [12]. And of course, that's only the people who admitted to being unfaithful - so the real figure would, I imagine, be higher. (It reminds me of the joke "95 out of a 100 men masturbate, and the other five are liars.")

There is, in fact, an entire book devoted to The Myth of Monogamy - that's the title of a book by David P. Barash and Judith Eve Lipton. In it, the authors note that:

When it comes to mammals, monogamy has long been known as a rarity. Out of 4,000 mammal species, no more than a few dozen form reliable pair-bonds, although in many cases it is hard to characterize them with certainty because the social and sexual lives of mammals tend to be more furtive then those of birds. Monogamous mammals are most likely to be bats (a few species only), certain canids (especially foxes), a few primates (notably the tiny New World monkeys known as marmosets and tamarins), a handful of mice and rats, several odd-sounding South American rodents (agoutis, pacas, acouchis, maras), the giant otter of South America, the northern beaver, a handful of species of seals, and a couple of small African antelopes (duikers, dik-diks, and klipspringers). A pitiful list. [13]

I must point out that the authors themselves aren't defenders of polyamory; in fact, regarding the notion that "open, unstructured, and nonrestrictive sexual relationships would make people happier" [14], they write:

There is no reason to believe that this is true. Indeed, many 'utopian' social experiments have failed precisely because feelings of interpersonal possessiveness got in the way of he idealized dream of social and sexual sharing . . . No other marital pattern - polygyny, polyandry, group marriage, 'open' marriage - has been shown to work better.

The problem with this is that the authors are selecting their data: they seem to be looking only at communes and ignoring the existence of a plethora of successful polyamorous relationships. However, they do note that monogamy:

Is altogether within the realm of human possibility. But since it is not natural, it is not easy. Similarly, this is not to say that monogamy isn't desirable, because there is very little connection, if any, between what is natural and easy and what is good. [16]

So as far as I can see, monogamy is not in fact biological natural for humans. Having said that, however, I believe that polyamory is not environmentally natural. By this I mean that so many of us are so saturated with notions of monogamy - from religious institutions, from our families, from our friends, from the media - that we can often find it difficult to imagine that it's anything other than "natural". But I believe it's no more "natural" than the English language is: it seems "natural" to think and speak in English when one has been raised in an exclusively English-speaking environment. But no-one, as far as I am aware, argues that English is our "natural" language.

I think monogamy is predominantly socially constructed, and saying that one is "hard wired" for monogamy - especially given that, if anything, research is tending to indicate that we're not "hard-wired" for monogamy - is as useful as saying one is "hard wired" for racism*. In my experience, such a claim often translates as "I really don't want to think about it" or "I don't want to have to examine myself on this issue". It reminds of a quote by Michael Rivero, who, I believe, developed the Web site WhatReallyHappened.com: "[m]ost propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all." People that actually take the time to work through their feelings on monogamy can come to conclusions that surprise them. For example, a secondary partner of one of my partners initially described himself as "naturally" monogamous, and that he didn't think he could be poly. Well, suffice it to say, from the way I just introduced him, it's clear that that turned out to not in fact be the case - and he even recently attended a poly convention in the US.

However, I should note at this point that I'm certainly not trying to say that polyamory is for everyone. I admire people who have gone through an extensive process of self-examination and have come out the other side feeling that monogamy is the best option for them, because they've at least challenged themselves on the issue. What concerns me is not monogamy in itself, but people's lack of willingness to challenge their monogamous beliefs.

It's not surprising, however, that people have such views when our society is dominated by imagery which implies "two partners good, four partners bad". Movies and television shows often show situations where one character has to choose between having a relationship with person A or a relationship with person B.

To give another example involving Willow, but this time from the television series Angel: I am told that when Willow had a cameo role in the show, one of the female characters, Fred, was so interested in Willow that Willow felt the need to tell Fred that she already had a girlfriend [17]. The interesting thing about this is that Willow makes the assumption that Fred will derive the statement "Willow is monogamous" from her statement about having a girlfriend. If I said to someone "I have a partner", and that person then assumed I wasn't therefore available for other people to have a relationship with, they'd be completely wrong.

As always, language use indicates typical views in our society; even when people try to avoid making assumptions by using the word 'partner' instead of 'wife', 'girlfriend', 'husband' or 'boyfriend', they still only use the singular instead of using a phrase like 'partner or partners'. And most, if not all, forms and surveys only provide space for the details of one partner - which is particularly frustrating when the survey in question is about one's relationships!

So what about jealousy? In The Ethical Slut, Easton and Liszt write that:

Jealousy feels really rotten and most of us will go to great lengths to avoid feeling it. However, your authors believe that most people take the destructive power of jealousy way too much for granted, that they give their jealousy far more power than it deserves. After many years of living free and dealing successfully with jealousy, we tend to forget that we live in a culture that considers it acceptable to divorce or even murder a sexually explorative partner who has committed the unthinkable crime of arousing jealousy in us. [18]

Further, an important distinction that I've learned to make over the years is to differentiate between jealousy and envy. People tend to throw around these words as though they're synonymous, when in fact, they're not. My dictionary defines 'jealous' as "suspicious of, or incensed at, rivalry: envious: solicitous: anxiously heedful: mistrustfully vigilant: brooking no unfaithfulness" [19]. On the other hand, 'envy' is defined as "ill-will, hostility (obs.): a feeling of chagrin at the good looks, qualities, fortune, etc. of another: an object or person contemplated with grudging or emulous feeling" [20]. So although there is certainly some overlap, the two terms are definitely not identical. A concrete example is the one in which I learned the difference between the two: one of my partners and I used to attend sex parties regularly. Whilst I felt comfortable playing with people other than my partner, I - to varying degrees - would regularly feel uncomfortable when my partner was playing with other people. Hearing this, most people would say "Well, it sounds like you were jealous". And I thought the same thing for a while. But after much discussion with myself and my partner about it, I realised that I was in fact envious. Why? Because it wasn't that I felt my relationship was threatened by the person or people she was playing with; it was that she was having sex with someone when I wasn't. Essentially, I was thinking "That's not fair! I want some of that!" In other words, I was envious of her, not jealous.

Having said all that, I want to be clear that I'm not saying that whenever people say they're jealous, that they're really envious. Even making the distinction between the two terms that I do, I know that there were times when I was definitely jealous. I'm just saying that there are probably often occasions when 'envy' is the more appropriate word to use to describe what we're feeling. And if it turns out that it is the appropriate word, that can help turn a discussion from being about limiting another person's behaviour to assisting another person to get their needs met.

It's important to note at here that some people feel unhappy when their partner doesn't get jealous seeing them involved with another person; often, in those situations, jealousy is seen as a signal that someone really loves you. Personally, I feel this is a rather odd criterion, and not a productive one; but to each their own.

One set of concepts that some people find useful when discussing polyamory are the notions of having 'primary', 'secondary' and 'tertiary' partners. Deborah Anapol, in her classic work Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits defines these terms as follows:

A 'primary' relationship describes:

[l]overs who are in a long-term, committed, marriage-type relationship . . . Usually primary partners live together and share finances, parenting and decision making. Primary partners are not necessarily legally married, but they are bonded together as a family. [21]

A 'secondary' relationship describes lovers who:

may also have a long-term, committed sexualoving relationship. But usually they live separately, have separate finances and see themselves as close friends rather than immediate family. Secondary partners may take on roles in each other's families similar to those of cousins, aunts and uncles in an extended family of blood relations. [22]

A 'tertiary' relationship describes:

[l]overs who spend time together only once in a while or for a brief time . . . Their contact may be very intimate, but they are not an important part of each other's day to day life. [23]

I can say from personal experience that these terms are not comprehensive; but I do regard them as useful starting points for discussion. For example, I tell people that I have two primary partners, in addition to whom I have another partner who I don't live with but am certainly in a relationship with (she doesn't like to use the phrase 'secondary relationship' to describe this situation, for a variety of reasons). But when I first got together with one of those primaries, it was a tertiary relationship. Within a couple of weeks, it had clearly become a secondary relationship. Not long after that, it became apparent that it was "more than secondary" but "not quite primary". And then, when the partner in question moved in with me, it became a very definitely primary relationship.

Then there are words to describe the structure of polyamorous relationships. I would describe the relationship structure I have with my primary partners as a 'V' relationship: I am positioned at the base of the V, and both of my partners at the top. (This has also been referred to as a 'hinge' relationship, where I would be considered the 'hinge'). However, my experience has been that people tend to assume that I'm in what is often referred to as a 'triad', which is where each person is in a relationship with the other two people. However, my two primaries are not in a relationship with each other - other than being good friends. This often disappoints many straight guys, who, upon hearing that I have two female partners, entertain visions of hot lezzo action every night. It turns out that this is not in fact the case, for a few reasons: we don't all sleep in the same bed (despite it being king size, there's simply not enough room for three people to sleep, as distinct from other 's' activities); one of my partners is heterosexual, whilst the other is bi; and finally, one of my partners works nights, which means she's going to bed only a couple of hours before I get up.

But this is not necessarily typical of polyamorous relationships - in fact, when it comes to describing polyamory, it's probably best to avoid any notion of a 'typical' polyamorous relationship. A friend of mine, who has two partners, sleeps in the same bed with them; they had to get the bed and associated bedding made up specifically. Some people just do whatever - they sleep wherever they feel like sleeping. Many people, upon first hearing about polyamory, assume that there must be some kind of 'roster' arrangement involved. Whilst this arrangement does indeed occur, it's certainly not an inevitable feature of poly relationships. People ask "But then how do you know where to sleep?" My reply is "Hang on - are you saying that you have a partner and friends you socialise with? How do you know when to spend time with your partner and when to spend time with your friends?" It all very much depends on the needs and wants of all the people involved.

Other types of polyamorous relationships include group marriage, which is sometimes incorrectly used as a synonym for polyamory (incorrectly, since polyamory does not necessarily involve commitment ceremonies) and line marriage, which is a relationship where, as the existing participants in the relationship grow older, younger people are added to the relationship.

The FAQ for the alt.polyamory newsgroup also lists quads, pentacles, and sextets as other terms that have been used to describe other forms of polyamorous relationships.

I believe that the current debate about "gay marriage" (has anyone noticed that it's often referred to that way, instead of, as would be more accurate, "same-sex marriage"?) needs to be part of a wider discussion about the diversity of relationships that exist in our society. We need to look behind the propaganda about monogamy:

that it's our 'natural' relationship style, and/or that any other relationship styles are 'unnatural' (as if something being 'natural' makes it right - after all, one only has to look at nature to find behaviours in animals that many people would consider highly immoral)

that it's the 'best' relationship style for everyone, regardless of time or place or personal circumstances;

that polyamory can't work, or that if it does, it can only do so for a limited period of time - that it is, in other words, not sustainable.

Widening the debate in this way would, I believe, assist those arguing in support of same-sex marriage by demonstrating that it's not just lesbians and gays who are living in relationships that aren't fully recognised by the state. Many people assume that the general public is 'not ready' to consider possibilities such as polyamory; and yet, as a historian of the gay and lesbian movements in Australia recently noted, it's turned out that the general public has typically been more progressive than legislators when it comes to issues of alternative sexualities and relationships. If that is indeed the case, we may hope that the Australian public becomes increasingly better educated on the realities of bisexuality and polyamory, such that both will move towards being accepted as valid and healthy forms of human intimacy.

Footnotes

1. A reader of this article pointed out that monogamy and racism are not morally equivalent. Whilst I think that enforced monogamy is unethical, I certainly feel it's incorrect to say that monogamy per se is unethical; whereas I believe that racism per se is inherently unethical. My point, however, was not to equate the two in terms of morality, but in terms of how people cite dubious rationales for being unwilling to challenge their beliefs. Bibliography

[1] A. Weber. "Survey Results: Who are we? And other interesting impressions", in Loving More Magazine Summer 2002, #30. p. 4. One-third of all 600 respondents declined to state sexual identity.

[2] Rebecca Kaplan. 1995. "Your fence is sitting on me", in Bisexual Politics: Theories, Queries & Visions, edited by Naomi Tucker. New York: Harrington Park Press. p. 270.

[3] "Sex in Australia: Summary findings of the Australian Study of Health and Relationships". Available online at http://www.latrobe.edu.au/ashr/Sex In Australia Summary.pdf

[4] Private communication, May 2004.

[5] Source: http://www.pha.org.au/anzjph/anzjph/2003 Edition/Vol 27 no 2- April/234.htm

[6] Source: http://www.biresource.org/bothteams/tips.html

[7] Anthony F. Jorm, Ailsa E. Korten, Bryan Rodgers, Patricia A. Jacomb and Helen Christensen, 2002. "Sexual orientation and mental health: results from a community survey of young and middle-aged adults", in the British Journal of Psychiatry 180. pp. 423-427. Available at http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/180/5/423

[8] Angelene Falk, Legal and Policy Branch, Anti-Discrimination Board, "Coverage of bisexuality: Request from Lesbian and Gay Consultation", 8-8-2002.

[9] "Bisexual Perspective on NSW Anti-Discrimination Legislation" A paper delivered by Glenn Vassallo, Bi Pride Australia, on 25 February 2003, for the Anti-Discrimination Board's Mardi Gras Forum 2003. Available at http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/adb.nsf/pages/bisexualperspective

[10] Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, "Australian Social Trends 2002, Family - State summary tables", available via http://www.abs.gov.au/

[11] Source: http://www.aifs.org.au/institute/pubs/WP20tables.html#table3 The entire report is available at http://www.aifs.org.au/institute/pubs/WP20.html

[12] Source: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=5775

[13] Barash, David P. and Lipton, Judith Eve. 2001. The myth of monogamy: fidelity and infidelity in animals and people. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC. pp. 11-12.

[14] ibid., p. 190.

[15] ibid., p. 190.

[16] ibid., p. 191.

[17] Private communication, May 2004.

[18] Easton, Dossie and Liszt, Catherine. 1997. The Ethical Slut: A guide to infinite sexual possibilities. San Francisco: Greenery Press. p. 133.

[19] Catherine Schwarz, George Davidson, Anne Seaton, Virginia Tebbit (eds.). 1988. Chambers English dictionary - 7th ed.. Edinburgh: W & R Chambers Ltd and Cambridge University Press. p. 765.

[20] ibid., p.477.

[21] Anapol, Deborah. 1997. Polyamory: The New Love Without Limits San Rafael: IntiNet Resource Center. p. 7.

[22] ibid., p. 7.

[23] ibid., p. 8.

Copyright (c) 2004, 2008 Alexis Hazell

Go to: http://www.pleasureactivism.org

You need JavaScript enabled for viewing comments

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
bisexuality and polyamory myths and realities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bisexuality and Polyamory Myths and Realities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Alexis Hazell [ Editor's note: This essay was derived from talks given at Deakin University and Monash University in 2004, and was originally published online on the bi.org.au Web site; it is republished here with some minor editorial changes. ] Bisexuality and polyamory are two forms of non-heteronormative behaviour that are commonly surrounded by misunderstandings, myths, and outright misrepresentations.

# data[].attributes.headline
Polyamory in the News: Bi and poly: The connection and the numbers

# data[].attributes.subject
Polyamory in the News: Bi and poly: The connection and the numbers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There's been a bit of an uptick in discussion of the bisexual-poly connection. For instance, on the blogsite of the mainstream Montreal Gazette, a frequent columnist ruminated:

Bisexuality, Monogamy and Polyamory

By Jillian Page

One of the biggest misconceptions about bisexual people, I am learning in my exploration of the subject, is that we are all polyamorous, that we have open lifestyles that see us engaging in multiple sexual relationships. Note the word "open" in that sentence. People who engage in polyamory, in theory, have the full consent of partners, as opposed to people who have "affairs"....

The fact of the matter is, bisexual people are mostly monogamous, from what I am reading. We have the capacity to love men, women and gender-variant people - as in, love transcends gender - but when they fall in love with someone and settle down, they do the traditional mating thing and are faithful to each other....

Or not, in large numbers. See further below.

...It wouldn't surprise me if... biphobia is rooted in monogamy and the incorrect belief that bisexual people are compulsive swingers.

Sooo, now I'm wondering about the discrimination faced by polyamorists, or would-be polyamorists. Suddenly, instead of seeing sexual orientation as heterosexual or lesbian or gay or bisexual, I am seeing a bigger picture with monogamy vs. polyamory, and I am getting the sense that polyamorists may face more discrimination than all of the others combined....

Read her whole article (March 24, 2013).

Then there was this from Cary Tennis, the advice columnist at Salon:

In response to a recent column abouta bisexual woman who was wondering if she should marry [where Tennis said "If there ever was a rational argument for polyamory and plural marriage. it is bisexuality"], some people wrote angrily to say that one does not have to want to be in a plural marriage to be bisexual.... They said that they were bisexual but happy in a committed monogamous relationship.... I erred in not speaking to enough bisexual people to understand the sensitivity of the issue.

But let me state affirmatively what underlies my thinking. People need to make choices based on who they really are. In order to do that they must have legal choices that suit who they are.

I am for maximum human freedom under the law. If being lesbian means one wants the right to be partners with women, and being gay means one wants the right to be partners with men, what does being bisexual mean if not that one wants the right to be partners with both sexes?

...Sometimes it is politically unwise to acknowledge the obvious.... Right now, we are seeing an unprecedented leap forward for sexual freedom. Ought we not take advantage of this moment and try to see the logic of the situation clearly?...

Whole article (April 15, 2013).

Speaking of logic (sigh), for the purposes that argument one could just as well be attracted to "both blondes and brunettes" as to "both men and women," but never mind. (I like Angi's take on his argument that she's just put up at The Radical Poly Agenda.)

More interestingly: How many bi people actually are poly? And vice versa?

A few years ago I rounded up research on this, and later Kelly Cookson of the PolyResearchers list added some annotated bibliography. Here's my current condensed version:

---------------------------------

1. Bi Polys. There's no question: bisexual people are way more abundant in the poly world than elsewhere. Some statistics and observations:

In Loving More magazine's survey of 1,010 polys taken in 2000, 667 stated their sexual preference; of these, 51% said they were bisexual.

In her article "Polyamorous women, sexual subjectivity and power" ( Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 34, 251-283; 2005), Elisabeth Sheff writes, "Bisexual women were quite numerous in polyamorous communities. In fact, bisexuality was so common among women in the polyamorous community that they had a standing joke that it allowed them to 'have their Jake and Edith too!'" (p. 266).

My own observation is that when you ask a roomful of people at a poly conference how many consider themselves bi, something like 30% or 40% raise their hands. Workshops at poly conferences on exploring your bisexuality are well attended. Various other informal estimates have put the proportion of bi polys at 30% to 60% of all polys. This compares to just 2.6% of the general population identifying as bi (at least among 18- to 44-year-olds, according to the CDC's National Survey of Family Growth, 2006-2010).

2. Poly Bis. Firmer statistics exist for the other side of the coin: How many bisexuals are poly?

Psychologist Geri D. Weitzman, in her paper "Therapy with Clients Who Are Bisexual and Polyamorous" ( Journal of Bisexuality, Vol. 6, Issue 1-2; 2006), wrote:

Page (2004) found that 33% of her bisexual sample of 217 participants were involved in a polyamorous relationship, and 54% considered this type of relationship ideal....

(The reference is in the paper's bibliography.)

Pepper Mint has written (on the LovingMore_Polyactive Yahoo group, May 24, 2007): "Kassia Wosick-Correa from UC Irvine has unpublished numbers that peg self-identified polyamorous bisexuals as 44% of all bisexuals."

In 2010 came this European report on preliminary results released from a large study, which found that 40% of bisexuals "consider themselves to be polyamorous." (The full study was to be published in 2011 in the Journal of Bisexuality.)

Kelly Cookson in 2010 provided additional references regarding how many bis are poly, with his brief summary of each:

Burleson (2005).Bi-America: the myths and truths of an invisible minority. Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press. In a chapter discussing the relationship between bisexuality and non-monogamy, Burleson claims bi people tend to be non-monogamous more than people of other sexual orientations. I got this from a secondary source: Tameeza, S. (2007) Bi and in love: A phenomenological inquiry into the committed couple relationships of bisexual women. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, California Institute of Integral Studies, San Francisco, CA.

George, S. (1993).Women and Bisexuality. London: Scarlet Press. See page 230: "Do you have simultaneous 'open' relationships (i.e., have several lovers who theoretically have the same importance)?" Out of 107 bisexual women that responded, 72 (67%) said no, 14 (13%) said yes, and 21 (20%) said they had open relationships in the past. So 35 (33%) of bisexuals in this study had open relationships at some point.

Klesse, C. (2006). "Polyamory and its 'others': Contesting the terms of non-monogamy."Sexualities, 9, 565-583. "Although polyamory is not essentially linked to any particular sexual identity, a significant part of the UK polyamory scene seems to consist of bisexuals or - as one of my interview partners3 put it - 'heteroflexibles'. It is not surprising, therefore, that polyamory emerged as one of the most significant discourses on nonmonogamy used by bisexual-identified participants in my study." p. 566.

Klesse, C. (2005). "Bisexual women, non-monogamy and differentialist anti-promiscuity discourses."Sexualities, 8, 445-464. "The scarce research into bisexual relationship practices (that mostly refers to the US context) suggests a relatively high frequency of nonmonogamous relationship arrangements among bisexual-identified women and men (George, 1993; Rodríguez Rust, 2000; Rust, 1996; Weinberg et al., 1994)." p. 448.

McLean, K. (2004 ). "Negotiating (non)monogamy: Bisexuality and intimate relationships." In R. C. Fox (Ed.),Current Research on Bisexuality (pp. 83-97). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press. In this study of bisexuals, 60 percent of the men and 52.5 percent of the women indicated their relationships were sexually open. Various forms of sexually open relationships were observed.

Rodríguez-Rust, P. C. (ed.) (2000).Bisexuality in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press.

Rust, P.C. (1996). "Monogamy and Polyamory: Relationship Issues for Bisexuals." In B. A. Firestein (Ed.)Bisexuality: The Psychology and Politics of an Invisible Minority (pp. 127-148). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. When bisexuals were asked about their relationship preferences, the most popular relationship preferences involved some form of sexual non-monogamy.

Sheff, E. (2005). "Polyamorous women, sexual subjectivity and power."Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 34, 251-283. "Bisexual women were quite numerous in polyamorous communities. In fact, bisexuality was so common among women in the polyamorous community that they had a standing joke that it allowed them to 'have their Jake and Edith too!'" p. 266.

Weinberg, M.S., Williams, C.J., Pryor, D.W. (1995).Dual Attraction: Understanding Bisexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. When bisexuals were asked about their ideal relationships, the most popular ideal relationships involved some form of sexual non-monogamy. Not all of them realized their ideal relationships. But 30 percent of them currently had more than one significant partner. (See Chapter 8.)

Here's my full previous post.

So there's a lot more available than guesswork! My working assumption from all of this is that roughly 40% of self-identified polys are bisexual, and roughly 40% of bisexuals are poly. But this awaits somebody rounding up all the current research and weighing the numbers intelligently. Thesis project, someone!

This also gets to the perennial question of how many self-identified poly people there are. News media keep quoting the 2009 Newsweek estimate of 500,000 poly households the U.S. But if the crossover percentage in the bi-poly matchup is the same in both directions (whether 40% or anything else), then the number of polys is equal to the number of bisexuals. For which there ought to be good modern numbers.

For instance, if we believe the CDC polling number that 2.6% of 18-to-44-year-olds in the U.S. say they are bi, that would imply there are 3.1 million U.S. polys. At least in terms of preferred relationship style.

Not sure I believe it.

Update, May 10, 2014: Elisabeth Sheff posts on her Psychology Today blog:

The most reasoned estimate of the number of poly people in the U.S. comes from Kelly Cookson, an independent Australian academic who looked at a lot of research and then compared the percent of bisexuals in poly research to the percent bisexuals in a national survey to inform his estimate. In an email interaction, Kelly Cookson summarized his results for me: "It appears that sexually non-monogamous couples in the United States number in the millions. Estimates based on actually trying sexual non-monogamy are around 1.2 to 2.4 million. An estimate based solely on the agreement to allow satellite lovers is around 9.8 million. These millions include poly couples, swinging couples, gay male couples, and other sexually non-monogamous couples."

Read Sheff's whole post, How Many Polyamorists Are There? (May 9, 2014).

Labels: bisexual, research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There's been a bit of an uptick in discussion of the bisexual-poly connection. For instance, on the blogsite of the mainstream Montreal Gazette, a frequent columnist ruminated: Bisexuality, Monogamy and Polyamory By Jillian Page One of the biggest misconceptions about bisexual people, I am learning in my exploration of the subject, is that we are all polyamorous, that we have open lifestyles that see us engaging in multiple sexual relationships.

# data[].attributes.headline
My poly adventure: Polyamory, bisexuality and me | Daily Loaf | Creative Loafing Tampa

# data[].attributes.subject
My poly adventure: Polyamory, bisexuality and me | Daily Loaf | Creative Loafing Tampa

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While being bisexual, lesbian or gay seem to be slowly gaining acceptance in "mainstream" America, there is one part of my life that still begets misunderstanding or hostility from even those within the LGBT community. Yes, not only am I bisexual, I choose to be polyamorous as well.

Some people don't understand it at all. Others mistake it for other lifestyles, like swinging. A band of bisexuals feel angry towards people like me because they think we perpetuate the idea that all bisexuals need both a man and a woman, that we're easy, that we can't be monogamous or other such fears.

I recently began talking with a beautiful woman (and my new crush) who poignantly wrote about why she chooses to be polyamorous. This inspired me to examine my own reasons for and perceptions of polyamory.

I had never even considered polyamory until last year but mostly because it had never occurred to me. I am extremely loyal in all of my relationships, and I would never want to cheat on someone or betray them. In our society, the only time I had heard of people dating more than one person were under such conditions. I hadn't thought of people loving more than one person at the same time, everyone knowing about it and being okay with it. But when my husband mentioned it, it seemed both so natural and obvious that I couldn't believe I hadn't thought of it before.

Also, the timing seemed right. I had just figured out that I wanted to kiss girls. Initially, it had seemed I'd only had two choices: I could stay married and try to ignore this new, huge part of me or I could get divorced so I could exclusively pursue relationships with women. All of a sudden there was an appealing option three: I remain married AND I date girls - either together with my husband or separately. For me, the last choice was by far the best option.

Any one of those options is a valid, respected, good choice for people in varying circumstances. I do not

think that polyamory is for everyone. It's not. People have different tastes for music, food, and movies or whether they prefer men or women, outgoing or reserved people, adventurous types or homebodies - so it makes sense that not everyone would go for polyamory - or for monogamy. People make this choice for different reasons, but both can produce beautiful, loving relationships. People have already proven that it is possible to love similar beings at the same time. We have multiple children, pets and friends that all demand our attention and love at the same time, and we generally balance those loves well.

Polyamory comes in countless forms, but there is no "right" way as long as there is good communication, respect, honesty - crucial ingredients to any poly-relationship. Some people have a primary lover and then a number of secondary lovers, who are all separate relationships but who all know about each other. Sometimes the primary and secondary lovers are intimate and connected, too. Others are in poly family groups where there is a group of lovers and everyone is connected to each other and live together - sometimes that means everyone is intimate, other times there are various combinations of people who are intimate while sharing a close, platonic love with the others in the group. There are both open and closed relationships. In open relationships, everyone involved is allowed to see other people outside of the core relationship, whereas in closed relationships, people within a specific poly group are exclusive to one another. The terms and definitions seem endless.

Originally, my husband and I set out to find a closed triad, where we would hopefully find a female who happened to fall for both of us and we'd be a happy little loving trio. While this is an ideal and many people set out to find this, we are also realistic. As in any relationship, it is a bad idea to be too rigid in what you are looking for, because ultimately reality will never live up to your expectations, and you could end up missing an even better possibility by being blinded by your supposed ideal. Also, we have to realize that the person we could find to date may want to pursue relationships outside of us, and we need to be open to that possibility. And, perhaps most importantly, it is unlikely that all three people would be equally as emotionally-attracted to one another all at the same time all at the beginning of the relationship. Expecting everyone to fall in love with each other at the same rate is only asking for heartbreak. (Been there, done that.) Love and attraction grow at their own pace, and setting expectations too high can lead to pressure, awkwardness and far greater challenges than are necessary. Better to give the relationship some room to grow naturally and just see what develops. Triads are possible, and many people make them work, but I didn't want this to be our only option.

Nick still holds onto the dream of the triad, but I tend to prefer we keep open minds and see what kinds of relationships come along. I think I prefer to start with dating separately and then see what happens. Nick and I have different dating styles anyway, and we end up at odds with each other or feeling frustrated by the way the other wants to date. I like to go a step or two slower than he does, so he ends up feeling held back by me, and I end up feeling pushed or rushed by him, and neither is a good way to feel at the start of a relationship. That's when things are supposed to be happy, exciting and new. Dating separately allows us to pursue relationships at our own speed, in our own styles, and let attraction take its natural course. If attraction later forms between her and the other half of the other half of the couple as well, then great. But if not, then that is okay too.

Each relationship - or relationship attempt - teaches us new and important lessons. The biggest lesson I learned from my last failed attempt is that it's important that our lovers have at least a friendly relationship with the other half of the couple. If Nick or my girlfriend has another significant other, then the same thing would apply. Anyone I date will have to understand that Nick is a huge part of my life, and we can't just go about dating and ignore the fact that he's there. It's not a long-distance relationship where he and I live in separate places, so we all will end up being in the same place at various points in our relationship, so it's important that everyone respects each other and can at least be friends. It is not at all necessary for everyone to be intimate, but I want us all to be able to watch a movie, have dinner or just talk without there be any weirdness. A bonus of learning these lessons is how exciting it then is when I find these important traits in another potential partner, this time realizing how special and crucial these traits are.

What polyamory is not:

Polyamory is not spouse-swapping or about casual, fleeting sexual encounters. It is an actual relationship, just like any other romantic relationship, just with more than one person. These relationships take work and commitment, and you have to feed the relationship - all branches of it - just as you have to with any successful relationship. It is not about one-night stands or casual threesomes or swinging.

That I am polyamorous does not mean that I am easy. Although sex can be a wonderful and beautiful product of such a relationship, it really is not about the sex. For me, I can't be sexual with anyone, man or woman, without a strong emotional connection first. I've always been that way. Some people may think I'm strange and argue that a kiss is just a kiss, but I don't enjoy or desire to kiss anyone without that little voice in my head saying "Hmm, I'm really attracted to and intrigued by you, and I would like to kiss you now." Never mind anything else. And that little voice does not kick in on physical attraction alone - nor does it kick in just because you happen to be either a man or a woman. I have had very few sexual partners in my life, and I am proud of that fact. Sex is special and wonderful and something I greatly enjoy, but I don't want to do it with just anyone.

Polyamory does not threaten monogamous relationships - for either straight, gay, lesbian or bisexual relationships. We in the LGBT community validly argue that our homosexual relationships (and our desire for marriage) do not endanger heterosexual relationships and marriages. They are separate but the same - we all are just two people who love each other and want to share our lives together. The same goes for polyamory - we are just a group of people in various combinations who love each other and want to share our lives together. Just because two women love making love to one another does not mean that is the only way for all women. And just because I am a bisexual woman who desires both a man and a woman in my life does not mean that all bisexual women want or need that.

Okay, so why poly?

The happiest times in my life have been when I've had a small but close group of friends with whom I can share anything and go everywhere. This has happened four or five times in my life, but as I got older, sometimes it was harder for people to realize why friends meant so much to me. They were all so distracted with boyfriends that friends would get ditched or bumped down a few notches. They never understood why I would be so hurt by this or why I didn't think of friends more casually like they did. I think the problem for me was that I didn't want those relationships to be lesser than the others. I didn't see why one couldn't invest in more than one relationship at a time, and because I was capable of that, it was hard to understand that others weren't.

I love the idea of having a group of people to love and who love me in return, and to have that wonderful feeling of intimacy that I have craved and sought my entire life. I have my little tribe of friends, and we are wonderfully close - they're just as much of a family to me than my family of birth. But there's just something unique and different about the thought of that kind of closeness taken to the next level.

I adore being intimate with a woman. And not even just the sexy parts (although I absolutely adore those parts, too. All of them.) I love the emotional closeness of having a girlfriend as well. Women are so different from men, and having a girlfriend is so different from having a husband. I love them both - individually, uniquely. I love the different ways I connect emotionally with women. We have shared experiences being of the same gender, and it's just... different. And wonderful. And as for those sexier parts? Women are amazing. I love their sweet fragrance, their silky skin, their soft curves. I love how when we hold hands, they are near the same size. I love how their bodies mirror mine but have so many exciting differences that are treasures to discover.

And I adore my man as well. We fit so well together, from our mutual geekiness to the way we work so well together as a team. From our love of German board games to the way he knows me so well. From the way I feel protected and safe when he curls around me at night to the sweet and thoughtful gestures he does for me. From his solid, manly physique to how when we hold hands, his hands are bigger than mine.

One unique aspect about me is that at least right now in my life, my desire for men and for women is off balance. I think it's probably because I only recently discovered the wonderful world of women and it's like I'm going through a second adolescence. My desire for men kicks in and balances out when there's at least the prospect of a woman in my life. I hate that it's like that right now, but that's just how it is for me. I think this will probably even out later, after I have had more female relationships, but at the moment, this is how it is for me. I know this is not the case for many bisexual women, but I also know that I am not alone.

No one is making me choose, so why should I? Because I was raised in a society that tries to tell people that if you are a woman then you should be with a man and only one man? No thank you. That can work for you, if you like, but I choose another way.

My parents are supportive, even if my mom doesn't totally understand it. I wish I could make her a promise when she says, "Well, just as long as nobody gets hurt," but I can't. It's a relationship, after all. Has there ever been a relationship where no one ever gets hurt? It is going to happen, and it has. Love and relationships always leave trails of broken hearts, bruises and scratches. Unfortunately, that's normal as you stumble towards figuring out what you want, who you want, and what works for you. But with each hurt comes important lessons - lessons that are crucial for the next relationship that comes around, as well as important lessons for what how things need to be to work for me and Nick, too. Each time we get hurt prevents even more hurt in the future.

With good communication, love and compromise, we can take on this exciting poly adventure together.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
My poly adventure: Polyamory, bisexuality and me

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While being bisexual, lesbian or gay seem to be slowly gaining acceptance in "mainstream" America, there is one part of my life that still begets misunderstanding or hostility from even those within the LGBT community. Yes, not only am I bisexual, I choose to be polyamorous as well.

# data[].attributes.headline
polyamory and asexuality - Asexual Relationships - Asexual Visibility and Education Network

# data[].attributes.subject
polyamory and asexuality - Asexual Relationships - Asexual Visibility and Education Network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Asexual Visibility and Education Network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I am a big fan of fanfiction and one of the authors I visit almost daily lives with her two husbands and one girlfriend in a polyamorous family unit. A recent blog she wrote about how polyamorous people interact with their exs got me thinking....could an asexual be part of a polyamorous relations...

# data[].attributes.headline
The Big, Fat Polyamorous Asexual Post | The Thinking Asexual

# data[].attributes.subject
The Big, Fat Polyamorous Asexual Post | The Thinking Asexual

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

# data[].attributes.body
Monosexuals and Bisexuals and other... Youtube video.

# data[].attributes.headline
Is Polyamory a Sexual Orientation? | Slog

# data[].attributes.subject
Is Polyamory a Sexual Orientation? | Slog