Social (In)justice: Who Says?

Read this and more on SexualityReclaimed :)

***


During the course of talking to my advisor yesterday (who, thankfully, is totally on my side), I was informed that not only are the other faculty members outraged at the ethical violations inherent in being a stripper while also training to become a therapist, they are outraged at how being a stripper contributes to further injustice in the world.

Apparently, stripping supports The Patriarchy, contributes to the objectification and violence against women, and supports trafficking of girls.
Holy $h!t.

Like I discussed earlier about patriarchy and stripping, I think this world is full of “both/and,” and far less of “either/or.” I will not disagree that by participating in stripping I am supporting the “male gaze.” I also think there is more to my story of stripping.

What matters, to me, is the personal intention, awareness, and small-scale action that takes place within oppressive structures.

What about my classmates who work at Target, an anti-LGBTQ company? Or classmates who are all about the bling (one, in fact, owns more than 500 pairs of shoes) and thus pay more attention to their material acquisitions than the fact that their consumerism and materialism contributes to the oppression of the poor? What about classmates who smoke and contribute to second-hand and third-hand smoke? Or, heaven forbid, what about my classmates who go to strip clubs as patrons?

This is about sex and it’s about sex work.

Like another student said to me yesterday: It’s pretty terrible how many times faculty in our program force others to sacrifice personal justice in the name of “social justice.”

Who gets to decide how an individual contributes to social justice or injustice? Especially over something so gray as the work that one does to support oneself?

The professor I met with said: It’s not about the exotic dancing.

But it is. There’s no way around that one.

Clarifying Values & What's Important

Read this and more on SexualityReclaimed!

***


I have been stressed out since my meeting with my professor. Luckily, I had social engagements planned beforehand for the weekend which all allowed me to get out and do things with people who care about me. I still found myself drifting off and zoning out, thinking about all of this crap. I told J on Friday: I don’t really feel like going out, I don’t really feel like doing this, but I think I probably should. And I’m glad I did. My counselor affirmed that as well (I saw her for a second appointment on Saturday to talk about everything): Make sure to schedule time to not think about all of this. It will be really important in allowing what’s important to you to rise to the surface.

So, in happy news: Friday night I had a fabulous date with a fabulous woman (yummy wine + The L Word + lady sex = AMAZING). Saturday night J and I went out for a little bit to the Velvet Rope (it was super dead there but I got to see my fave male stripper). Sunday night we had a really fun hang-out and movie night time with some of our besties (and watched “A Good Old Fashioned Orgy,” which was surprisingly good and I actually really enjoyed!!)

My counselor recommended that I try to clarify what is important to me to guide my decision making. She asked me, What floats to the surface with all of this? Here are some of the points I have sussed out so far:

1. I want to end dancing on my own terms, not on someone else’s. I don’t think I will have closure and the resolution I want otherwise. Dancing has been about self-empowerment on a number of levels, and so to end because someone else told me I cannot do it (for whatever reason) would be highly unsatisfying. Being bullied into quitting dancing is not okay for me.

2. Dancing has become more and more political to me, and my ability to dance has taken on more macro level importance: sex worker rights, un-shame-ing (i.e., empowerment of) and allowing space for female sexuality, etc. My personal act of dancing in the way that I do it has political implications of disturbing stereotypical ideas of what it means to be a stripper, what female sexuality looks like and can be, what it means to be a woman, what it means to be an activist. I can’t ignore the broader implications of engaging in sex work (and what it would mean to have a professor tell me I cannot do it because it is “unethical”).

3. I have worked really hard to be out as myself with most people in most contexts. I don’t intend to give it up. Being out is one of my core values.
I am sure there will be other main points if importance that come up for me in the coming weeks, but this was a good start that I had over the weekend. I can start to see some potential paths take more shape, and I am confident that as long as I figure out what is important to me and stick by that, that I will make the decision that is right for me.

Thank you to everyone for your support and love. I have been overwhelmed this weekend by everyone around me (in-person, via email, on Facebook, on here) that has shown me support. Thank you.

Making Choices: Getting Naked? Stay in School?

Read this and more on SexualityReclaimed!

***


Okay, friends, this one is a mess. In large part, because I am a mess.

I was asked by my professor (the one who told me a few months ago that my experience as a stripper could be an ethical issue) to meet with her before winter break. I practiced deep breathing as I walked into her office, still feeling happy from J and I getting married (this meeting happened about an hour after that). As I sat down, I reminded myself to stay calm and collected.

Basically:

She, as the department chair, along with the other three core faculty and the dean, met at some point during the semester to discuss whether or not my stripping experience is an ethical issue. They filled out some sort of professional evaluation form, and as a group (she maintained), they see my occupation as a serious boundary violation and ethical issue in conflict with the code of ethics for marriage and family therapists. Why? Because of the potential for future clients to have seen me dance, the potential for current clients of mine to see me dance, and the potential for the former clients to see me dance. To her, this constituted a seriously problematic multiple relationship. In addition, for some reason, she sees it as a “conflict of interest” (what? am I going to sell lap dances after a therapy session?). This serious ethical issue was held by her regardless of whether I stop dancing now or not.

I can’t disagree that it would be a multiple relationship to have a concurrent therapist-client and stripper-customer relationship with someone. I also would not do that. I also feel it is paternalistic and arrogant to say that I am responsible for making sure that any potential client of mine never sees me out in public doing something that is not mainstream.

I didn’t go into this program to be a cookie-cutter therapist. I went into it with the explicit goal and intention of serving the queer, kinky, poly, and sex positive community (including sex workers). I’ve been completely open with my cohort and professors about my experiences and motivations, and now the message I receive is: sorry, too much. As my friend said to me today: They are grinding you down.

She said: It’s not about exotic dancing! We want you to dance, we want you to feel empowered and to feel empowered sexually. But this is a serious ethical issue.

Is is possible for me to truly understand the code of ethics and continue to dance? I asked.

No, she replied.

If it was up to me, in my personal opinion, she said, I wouldn’t place you next year [for an internship] if you were still dancing.

Think it over during your winter break, she told me. Then in January, I want to meet with you again. If you agree, then we can move forward. If you disagree that this a serious ethical issue, then we will need to convene an Academic Review Committee and investigate further. You will probably need quite a bit of mentoring to fully understand why this is such a problem. It is possible that the result from the committee process that you won’t be allowed to continue in the program.

I left that half hour meeting boiling. I hardly had a chance to speak, to ask questions, to present my case.

I literally feel stuck. I feel angry, boxed in, aggravated, irritated, helpless, hopeless, disheartened, defeated. Defeated.

Pick my battles, figure out my goals, move forward. Give up stripping? Give up school? I’m sure I’ll be writing about this again when my thoughts are more clear.

And yes, I am writing this from the strip club. (My nice way of saying: Fuck. You.)

Eroticization of People of Color

Read this and more on SexualityReclaimed :)

***

This post has been sitting in my drafts folder for a while. It’s such a huge topic and I am aware, that as a white woman, I can never do it justice. This also isn’t an exhaustive or academic-type post. This post includes only my personal reflections and perspective.

While I grew up in a pretty white town, it also had a sizable Hispanic and Hmong population. My first, longest, and most serious relationship in high school was with a guy who was of mixed race (Mexican and Filipino). I found our color difference sexy, appealing, intriguing, erotic, exotic. I was attracted to him for many reasons, and I know that his skin color, the shape of his eyes, his hair were all attractive to me because they were different that mine. I am sure that larger cultural messages surrounding the eroticization of people of color had impacted what I found sexy and desirable. There are so many examples of this, they are too many to count and name. And these messages have a long history, from colonization and the white people conquering “exotic” lands. (Black men are dangerous to white women, Black women are either the mammy or Jezebel, Asian women are frequently infantilized and sexualized, etc.) In any case, those attractions have not gone away for me.

I find many Black men (and women) attractive (let’s just stop me there for a minute. Because given where I grew up and where I live now, it’s not like I have large numbers of Black people in my social network. I don’t have a large number to go off of.) Because of our involvement in swinging and hotwifing, I have frequently thought about my personal eroticization of men of color in particular. I don’t know if I have any specific thoughts, except that I find myself wanting to make sure that I am still engaging in the same level of communication with my partners who are of color; I want to make sure I am not treating anyone differently because of their skin color. Because I have frequently lusted after Black men, I am hyper-aware of how I interact with my partners of color versus white partners: how much time do I want to spend talking versus fucking, and am I able to be communicative about my desires? I don’t want to become a white woman who only seeks “big, black cocks” (BBC). (For the record, BBC doesn’t seem to play into my attraction to Black men. It’s the skin color contrast. And, if I’m being totally honest, it also has to do with the fact that Black men are exotic to me in my white bread life.) I don’t want to disregard any potential for more-than-a-fuck-buddy type relationship simply because this partner is Black, and while he is sexy as hell and perfect for my sexual fantasies and desires, I’m not so sure I want more than that with him.

I remember reading this article about a year ago about cuckolding culture, and this piece is relevant to my post:

*

“Other sites feature images ranging from semen dripping over wedding bands to ethereal caucasian goddesses standing next to black men in mirrored shades. The race thing is one of cuckolding’s more uncomfortable aspects. On most cuckolding sites, such as blacksonwives.com and myslutwife.com, there is an overwhelming preoccupation with “Mandingos,” or well-endowed black men. Similar racial parameters exist in the swinging community, as highlighted in Details magazine’s March article on “Mandingo parties” — interracial orgies arranged for single black men to have sex with white wives in front of their white husbands. The popularity of the orgies is buttressed by a two-prong fantasy: the white couple’s fetish for a “BBC” (big, black cock), and the Mandingo’s fetish for having sex with rich, white wives. All participants get something out of it, and a Mandingo even argues that interracial orgies are a by-product of multiculturalism and tolerance. But bigotry — and a dose of white guilt — lie at the heart of any racialized fetish: black men, despite their “superior” sexual prowess, are debased and eroticized, and believed to pose less of a threat because the wives would supposedly never date them.
The cucks I interviewed denied having a preference for Mandingos, but would eventually admit some sort of racialized, if not racist, baggage. Bob, a forty-seven-year-old caucasian male, says he found a relationship through an online ad posted by a woman pursuing black bulls. “I emailed her because I was hoping to fall in love with a sexual white woman who does black guys,” he says. “We hooked up and it was really wild.”

“In American cuckold culture,” he adds, “it’s the white couple that has black bulls. There’s a notion that black men are better-endowed, and the whole idea of white men getting off on feeling sexually inferior to black men.”
A Black-Puerto Rican bull I interviewed does not answer white couples’ ads because “they tend to be more rigid in terms of what they look for in a bull,” he says. “If you’re a black bull, you’d better fit the mold of what the stereotypical black guy is. To them, he’s a cornrow-wearing thug or basketball player. They’re more into the fantasy — the big, black Mandingo.”

“Most black men are not offended by the stereotype that they’re well-hung,” he continues. “But what gets on my nerves is when the ad says, ‘We want a gold-toothed, baggy-pants type,’ or, ‘We want you to look like Allen Iverson or Usher.’ You know what? The typical bull on Craigslist is not going to look like Usher, so get over your stereotype and deal with it.”

*

My most recent encounter with this topic, in the reverse, went along the lines of:

I was giving a private dance to a Hispanic man from CA, who happens to be from the same area I am from. “White women are the best.”

“Oh yeah?”

“Yeah. Black women, Hispanic women- they don’t even come close. White women- they’re the sexiest.”

I was speechless. I didn’t know what to say. It was my first intimate sexual encounter with racism. (that I can remember)

It’s one thing to me to notice particular attractions and erotic fantasies based on race. It’s another to classify entire groups of people as “sexy” and “not sexy” based on their race. But then I ask myself: is that what I have done? Can I help it? How do I ensure that I have equitable intimate relationships informed both by a sense of desire and lust and fantasy, and by a sense of social justice and explicit communication?

PS: I am nervous writing and publishing this post. I am aware that this topic (racism, sexualization of people of color) is deep and sensitive. I also think I will never get it quite right. So if you read something that offended you or struck a nerve, please let me know as I want to continue to learn and right my mistakes.

Support Your Local Beautiful Losers

Read this and more on SexualityReclaimed!

***


I bought this shirt a couple of weeks ago, and it finally arrived yesterday:



A bartender at my club was wearing it, and I instantly fell in love with the design, the sentence structure, the many meanings. It feels provocative and powerful to me, disrupting ideas of patriarchy and slut-shaming in subtle and shifty ways. Or maybe I’m reading too much into it.

Does it refer to the service industry? The young and underemployed? Strippers? Who are the losers?

How do I feel identifying as a “beautiful loser”?

How would this shirt be different without the word “beautiful”: Support your local losers ? Why does being beautiful matter in also being a loser? I have some ideas… Do you?

If you want one, search for Bandit Brand on Etsy and email the owner. She made one for me when I messaged her saying I desperately wanted one!! :D

Competition Among Women

Read this on SexualityReclaimed!

***

J passed along this article on NYT a few days ago: A Cold War Fought By Women

It is an interesting article about competition among women, and a great example of self-policing among women to enforce purity and virginity standards.

I think it makes some great points, but when I reached these quotes from Dr. Vaillancourt, one of the study researchers, I felt a little anxious:

“The research also shows that suppression of female sexuality is by women, not necessarily by men…Sex is coveted by men… Accordingly, women limit access as a way of maintaining advantage in the negotiation of this resource. Women who make sex too readily available compromise the power-holding position of the group, which is why many women are particularly intolerant of women who are, or seem to be, promiscuous.”

While the researchers and others quoted in the article assert that this self-policing seems to be an evolutionary characteristic and reflects attitudes within society, and not something that has been impacted or influenced by media images of the ideal women, I don’t totally buy it.

The system of patriarchy has been present among so many human cultures for so long, that it seems extraordinarily difficult to know for sure if it is patriarchy or evolution that has helped form this competition among women and preference among women for women who present as non-threatening and non-promiscuous.

Thoughts?

Sexuality Critical Genogram

Read this on SexualityReclaimed!

***

A major tool used in my counseling program is the genogram, which is basically a family tree. It is typically used during the first few sessions to diagram a client’s family (which could be an individual, couple, or family) back at least three generations. The point is to help clients see intergenerational patterns. They’re pretty cool.

In class this week, we talked about the critical genogram, which is a genogram that also depicts a client’s particular social location (related to gender, sexual orientation, class, race, ability, age, religion, etc.) and how larger systems (like patriarchy, racism, etc.),  have influenced the client’s experience of their social location and presenting problems.

So I decided to draw one depicting my perception of how larger systems of patriarchy, monogamy, and religion have influenced my experience of my relational orientation, gender identity, and sexual orientation. The main messages I have received from those larger systems include “Women are possessions, property, need to be owned, controlled, and contained,” “Sexuality is sinful, immoral, unhealthy, wrong, bad,” and “Female sexuality is especially sinful, immoral, unhealthy, wrong, bad.” While I have largely cut myself off from those larger systems, I am still influenced by them because of my relationships with my family, larger community, and the messages I receive from media. I experience relatively integrated relationships with my relational and sexual orientations (I feel really comfortable identifying as queer and having an open/poly relationship), but my relationship with my gender identity (woman) feels more complicated. Because I can’t completely separate stripping from patriarchy, my identity as a woman and my enjoyment and participation in the strip club culture feels complicated and richly complex.

I am excited thinking about constructing genograms with my future clients, especially sexuality genograms, which involves questions about sexual history, familial messages about sex and love, and experiences in current romantic relationships. I’m also really excited thinking about creating a way to construct and use a genogram for poly folks and families.

Here is my sexuality critical genogram :) I’m the pink circle.

Fat Stigma & Acceptance

Another really fascinating part of school last week was a presentation on fat studies, fat stigma, and fat acceptance.

Here are my notes from class (a lot of it is verbatim from the presentation slides; contact me if you want the reference):

-Fat studies: interdisciplinary; primary focus on identification/elimination of bias based on body weight, shape and size; deconstructs and critiques research related to weight and obesity; challenges cultural and political meanings ascribed to the fat body; challenges medical models that pathologize fat and prescribe weight-loss as a means of attaining health; weight/size bias combined with oppression based on other areas of difference such as gender, race, social class, and sexual identity
 
-Fat bias in the dominant culture:

• Research related to systemic fat/size discrimination is less common, but no less valid, than findings that continue to report ongoing oppression in race and gender
• Discrimination evident in hiring, wages, promotion, employment termination, delays in obtaining necessary healthcare, ability to obtain health care coverage, acceptance to college, parental financial support for college
• Similar pattern of discrimination (but more research needed) in public accommodations, jury selection, housing, adoption, representation of overweight participants in research
• Stereotypes of people perceived as overweight: lazy, less conscientious, less competent, sloppy, disagreeable, emotionally unstable, slower, poor attendance records, stupid, and worthless 
• These stereotypes are based simply on appearance or perception and are unrelated to actual health

-Dominant culture belief that being fat is a moral choice related to a lack of discipline: if fat people simply ate less and exercised more, they would lose weight and thus not have to experience the stigma and shame of being fat
 
-Losing/regaining weight can be more physically damaging to people than remaining at higher weights
 
-Counselors must challenge their own biases and assumptions about fat clients and presumptions of weight loss to promote genuine emotional and physical health, regardless of size
 
-Health at Every Size: a fast-growing approach that work to separate the issue of size and health
 
-Fatosphere: fat blogosphere

-My main question at the end of the presentation was: how do fat studies address the issues of food desserts, cheap unhealthy food, and the intersection of those with class and SES? What about the politics of safe public spaces, gentrification, etc?

This is a fabulous article I ran across the next day after my class; I love it:

Let's Talk About Thin Privilege

Fatness brings up a lot of emotions for me. My mom gave my sister and I a lot of training around the "right" body shape and size, even while also trying to help us love our bodies "no matter what." From my public health education, I have been acculturated to medicalize bodies: obesity=bad for health. I have my own body image stuff, which has been at times both exacerbated and soothed by comparing myself to movie stars, models in magazines, my friends, stripping, and being in an open relationship (and being more exposed to naked bodies). 

J and I have had a number of conversations, and sometimes with other people, that attempt to delineate the difference between discrimination against certain body types/shapes/sizes and preference/attraction/chemistry. There is clearly a difference to me and it feels quite different. However, I have seen the two conflated very unattractively in open spaces. For instance, I know that our swingers' clubs attract a wide variety of people, and I am glad that the spaces are relatively inclusive. But when I meet people who disparage fat people and their presence at our clubs and then cloak that sentiment in "well I don't want to go somewhere where I'm just not attracted to the people," my social (in)justice radar goes nuts. Just say it: you don't like fat people. Or, when J and I were socializing with a couple at a club, J asked the guy if he and his partner have a "type." He responded simply with "thin people." Why? I'm guessing because, for him, "thin people" connotes other positive qualities: good, healthy, smart, hardworking, etc. 

Want to test your own implicit attitudes toward fat people and thin people? Take the Implicit Association Test! You can take the test on myriad other categories of people, too. My own results: moderate preference for thin people. (I wonder when they'll add a category for alternative relationship structures?)

Patriarchy & Stripping

We had a pretty thought-provoking panel this week in my equity class: all three guest were white, straight men talking about their experiences with patriarchy. It was really interesting because they have all taken a path to counter patriarchy in their lives, and they discussed how this has affected their relationships with their families of origin, how they view the world, etc. 

One little comment at the end was evident to me that the men took different feminist views than me:

One man made some disparaging remark about "ugh strip clubs" and "yeah, isn't it crazy Portland has like the highest number per capita?" [Subtext: isn't that awful??]

I caught my professor's eye and she sort of apologetically/nervously smiled at me. I felt pretty calm; I expect to encounter that kind of attitude sometimes. I know it's a pretty dominant discourse (strippers are oppressed women who have internalized patriarchy; there is no other explanation that tells us why women engage in sex work. Or, women are forced to strip or engage in sex work to make money. The power flows from the dominant group-men-to women in the form of exchanging money for sexual energy.)

The thing is: I can't really argue that strip clubs don't support patriarchy. I also can't say that I'm not stripping outside the patriarchal system. I know I have been socialized to desire attention and to dress and present myself in ways that are pleasing to those gazing upon me (namely, men). 

But the explanation that patriarchy has oppressed me and forced me to strip is too simplistic for me. There are so many other factors at play (which I have discussed at length in various posts).

It's fascinating to me, and I try as best I can to simply remain curious about, the variety of views within the folks who identify as a feminist. This particular guy, who so clearly and evidently opposed men powering over women and supported women as equals, inadvertently took agency and power away from the women who engage in sex work. Simply by making a negative comment, and assuming he knows the motivations and stories of all sex workers, he once again assumed the dominant role: "I know what's best for women: not stripping."

[Of course: people can have different views, and I think that first-wave feminism language is powerful and persuasive. But again: for me, it takes away power from individual women and is too simplistic. This picture assumes that one cohesive "feminism" has the answers to dismantling a thousands-year system of privilege and oppression, when in reality, there are so many diverse beliefs under that umbrella and so many ways of subverting power.)

The truth is, for me, is that all of these factors (including the system of patriarchy) have influenced me. Which means I embrace the "both, and" approach to life, not the "either/or." I can be a stripper and a feminist and queer and straight-looking and a lover of consent and someone who has non-consent fantasies. I hold many complex, seemingly opposing desires and beliefs and identities, inside me, as do (I believe) most people.

AAMFT Conference: Day 1

I had the opportunity to attend the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists (AAMFT) annual conference- it was pretty convenient given it is in Portland this year :)

I was most excited about today, because my events included:
A workshop on Sexuality in Family Therapy
A discussion on LGBTQ youth
And a workshop on Plural Families

Tomorrow includes a workshop on treating children with trauma and how to treat couples where abuse has occurred.

So many things to say!

1. Sexuality in Family Therapy: The facilitators of the workshop conducted research on therapist attitudes toward client perceived sexual problems (presenting as a sex addict) based on whether the client was monogamous or in an open marriage and a man or a woman. Participants in the study in which they read one vignette; the four possible vignettes only differed in the gender of the client and the relationship style. Women in open marriages were rated most negatively and pathologized the most, meaning that therapists were most likely to refer a woman in an open marriage for treatment and to label her sexual behaviors as problematic. Next worst were men in open marriages. Next were men in monogamous marriages. Women in monogamous marriages were rated least negatively (least likely to have their behaviors labeled as problematic). My takeaway: our society still very much pathologizes and demonizes female sexuality. Promiscuous women=bad news. Promiscuous men? Bad, but expected. Monogamous women? Virtuous.

The presenters also discussed the issue of including children and teenagers as part of family therapy, even when issues of sexuality needs to be discussed- of course, in age-appropriate, developmentally-appropriate ways. Also, therapists must be aware of their own reservations or issues around sexuality so that they can best serve their clients by using explicit language, calm demeanor, and engage in frank conversation about sexuality and sex. (I think I will be okay regarding that!)

2. LGBTQ & Youth: We talked a lot about queer therapists self-disclosing their queer identity to queer clients. Is it appropriate? When? What are the effects of self-disclosure? Also: why aren't queer issues a bigger part of the AAMFT conference? Why aren't queer issues given a workshop space or a keynote address??

3. Plural Families: I was so jazzed for this one, because I thought for sure it would be addressing polyamorous families. Wrong! The presenters intentionally stayed away from polyamory, and instead focused on polygamous and plural marriages. It was still super interesting, and when I asked the presenters why they chose to focus on polygamy and didn't include polyamory, their reasoning was that they didn't want to just lump all of these alternative relationship structures together and ultimately do a disservice to both. That made sense to me. There was also some good discussion that I participated in about ensuring that therapists do not collude with polynormativity and remembering that poly relationships come in all shapes, sizes, and flavors. I also talked to one of the presenters after the workshop, and she works with people in poly relationships, people in the BDSM community, and trans* folks. So awesome!!! She told me there are only a handful of loud and proud marriage and family therapists serving those communities. I'm excited to join the ranks! They handed out some fabulous resources. The following one is my favorite; I can't believe I hadn't run across it before!! Cory Davis made a monogamy privilege questionnaire, akin to Peggy McIntosh's Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack targeted toward discovering white privilege. It's fabulous: Monogamous Privilege Checklist.

In fact, I am just going to copy and paste it here as well:

For the purposes of this list, I will refer to one’s position on the diagram of monogamy vs. various types of non-monogamy (polyamory, open marriage, swinging, religious polygyny, etc.) as simply “relationship orientation”.

Note that for the purposes of this list, “relationship orientation” does NOT refer to one’s sexual orientation re: the Kinsey scale (heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, etc.). Monogamous individuals who are LGBTQ and/or in interracial and/or intergenerational romantic relationships may well be exempt from some (though not all) of these privileges, especially those marked with an asterisk at the end.
Monogamous Privilege Checklist:
1) I can legally marry whomever I wish, with all the legal, medical, and financial benefits of marriage universally recognized for me and my family no matter where I live.*
2) I am not accused of being abused, warped, immoral, unethical, or psychologically confused because of my relationship orientation.
3) No one ever questions the validity of my love because of my relationship orientation.
4) It is not assumed based on my relationship orientation that I or any of my former or current partners has been misled, coerced, manipulated, or used in any way.
5) No one argues that my relationship orientation is impractical, unstable, incompatible with commitment, or otherwise effectively impossible to realize. No one argues that my relationship orientation works better in theory than in practice.
6) It is not assumed that my life must be overly-complicated because of my relationship orientation.
7) No one tries to convert me to their relationship orientation.
8 It is not assumed that I will switch relationship orientations as soon as I find the “right” person.
9) It is not generally understood that I am unfit to raise children because of my relationship orientation.
10) I can feel certain that my government will not suddenly remove my children to a foster home based on my relationship orientation.
11) As a responsible and loving parent, I won’t lose my children in a custody battle because of my relationship orientation.
12) As a responsible and loving adult, I can adopt children without lying about my relationship orientation.
13) I can be certain that my children won’t be harassed because of my relationship orientation.
14) My children are given texts and information at school that validates my family structure – two parents with kids, two sets of grandparents, etc.
15) It is not assumed based on my relationship orientation that my children are/were raised in an unstable environment.
16) No one assumes or speculates based on my relationship orientation that my children experience or ever will experience emotional, psychological, social, or behavioral problems.
17) I do not have to explain my relationship orientation to strangers whenever it comes up.
18) People don’t ask why I made my choice of relationship orientation.
19) People don’t ask why I made my choice to be public about my relationship orientation.
20) I don’t have to defend my relationship orientation.
21) I am not identified, categorized or grouped by my relationship orientation.
22) I am never asked to speak for everyone who shares my relationship orientation.
23) My individual behavior is not thought to reflect on all persons who identify with my relationship orientation.
24) If a romantic relationship of mine ends, no one blames my relationship orientation.
25) I can be sure that all of my roommates, classmates, and coworkers will be comfortable with my relationship orientation.
26) When I talk about my monogamy (such as in a joke or talking about my relationships), I am never accused of pushing my relationship orientation onto others.
27) I do not have to fear revealing my relationship orientation to friends or family. It’s assumed.
28) I do not have to fear that if my family, friends, or professional community find out about my relationship orientation there will be economic, emotional, physical, or psychological consequences for me or for others.
29) I can run for political office without expecting that my relationship orientation will disqualify me.
30) I can depart from most meetings, classes, and conversations without feeling fearful, excluded, isolated, attacked, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance, stereotyped or feared because of my relationship orientation.
31) I can date whomever I wish, regardless of whether or not they previously identified with my relationship orientation, without fear that my new partner will be shunned by their friends and family due to their choice to embark upon a relationship with someone of my relationship orientation.
32) I am guaranteed to find people of my relationship orientation represented in my workplace.
33) I can be sure that my classes/courses/training will require curricular materials that testify to the existence of people with my relationship orientation.
34) I can easily find a religious community that will not exclude me based on my relationship orientation.
35) I am guaranteed to find sex education literature for people with my relationship orientation.
36) I can count on finding a therapist or doctor who will recognize my relationship orientation as valid, should I seek their services.
37) I can be sure that if I need legal or medical help my relationship orientation will not work against me.
38) Public hand-holding with my love is seen as acceptable and endearing. I can walk in public with my partner and not have people stare or do a double-take.*
39) I can choose not to think politically about my relationship orientation.
40) I can remain oblivious to the language and culture of other relationship orientations (i.e. polyamory, swinging, etc.) without paying any penalty for such obliviousness.
41) Even if I am oblivious about other relationship orientations, my culture affords me the privilege of judging those orientations and being an authoritative source of relationship advice because I am monogamous. This is especially true if I am a therapist, researcher, media darling, or other authority figure.
42) In everyday conversation, the language my friends and I use generally assumes my relationship orientation. For example, “family” meaning monogamous relationships with children.
43) Nobody calls me monogamous with malice.
44) I am not asked to think about why I am monogamous.
45) Society encourages me to marry and celebrates my commitment.*
46) My relationship orientation is commonly represented in music, television, movies, books, magazines, greeting cards, and postcards.
47) Major, mainstream social networking websites such as Facebook allow me to set my relationship status according to my relationship orientation.
48) I can go to relationship and dating events (i.e. singles events, relationship skills workshops) secure in the knowledge that my relationship orientation will be the standard and will be catered to.
49) I never need to change pronouns when describing the events of my life in order to protect my job, my family, or my friendships.*
50) If I’m a teenager, I can enjoy dating, first loves, and all the social approval of learning to love appropriately within my relationship orientation.*
51) If I’m called to work with children or to serve God (in most denominations), I don’t have to lie about my relationship orientation in order to keep my job.
52) I can count on my community of friends, acquaintances, strangers, and various institutions to celebrate my love and my family, mourn my losses, and support my relationships.*
53) It is not assumed merely because of my relationship orientation that I am experienced in sex (or that I even have it at all!).
54) It is not assumed that I am inclined toward my relationship orientation purely for sexual reasons.
55) It is not assumed based on my relationship orientation that I am more likely than average to have STIs.
56) It is not assumed based on my relationship orientation that I am unaware of the risks posed by my sexual behavior.
57) I am not assumed based on my relationship orientation to be sexually indiscriminate.
58) I do not have to deal with the language and culture of my relationship orientation being co-opted, redefined, and demonized by an unfriendly majority which controls the media.
59) No one ever calls my relationship orientation “creepy” or “disturbing”.
60) I can befriend people without them and/or their romantic partners assuming that I am trying to convert them to my relationship orientation.
61) No one takes issue with their children being around me based on my relationship orientation.
62) I can be fairly certain that anyone who is in a committed, romantic relationship with me will also be invited to most parties, weddings, and other social events to which I am invited.*
63) No one makes assumptions about my political views or religious beliefs based on my relationship orientation.
64) No one refers to my relationship orientation by the wrong term or label, either intentionally or inadvertently.
65) I do not have to coin or invent terms to describe my relationship orientation and familial connections to others, because the language describing my relationship orientation already exists and is known throughout the culture.
66) No one ever ridicules or makes jokes about the terminology that people with my relationship orientation commonly use to describe their relationship structures and familial connections.

Breaking Through, Being Out in Politics, & Microaggressions

J and I went to one film from the Portland Gay & Lesbian Film Festival, "Breaking Through," and it was really fabulous. It was about politicians and public figures who are out. There were a number of gay men and lesbians in the film, as well as one transgender and one bisexual. The point of the film, the filmmaker said, was to inspire hope in LGBTQ people of all ages (but mainly youth) that things can be better. It was inspirational and really well done. I found myself tearing up a number of times at the stories and experiences described. 

It was an important thing for me to attend because I had just gone through the whole day falling apart (which J can attest to). What am I doing? Do I really want to be a therapist? Is this a workable plan? Can I fully be myself and do this as a job? If it's not this, what do I want to do?

Attending the screening was like the universe's way of saying: Breathe. Be Yourself. Do What You Want. That's basically how the filmmaker introduced the film: to anyone living on the margins of society, live authentically to live a joyous life. I almost started crying (again) right then.

So I really can't say enough good things about the film, except there's always something :-P

While I thought every person in the film was well-intentioned with their comments and articulations of their experiences, there was one sentence, that once I heard it, I had difficult truly experiencing the rest of the film.

Kate Brown, Oregon's Secretary of State and bisexual, was recalling the story of how one constituent asked her about being bisexual and what that meant (something along those lines). In response she said something like, Well I'll tell you that I am monogamous and that's more than the rest of the guys [politicians] around here could tell you! It was meant to be funny, and many people in the audience laughed.

A microaggression is a brief and subtle way of indicating hostility toward a group and asserting power and privilege over that group. Microaggressions come in many forms:
Women are just emotional.
You know your life will be hard if you are gay, right?
I can't believe you speak English so well! [to an ethnic minority]
Or, like what my first therapist told me (several times) in response to hearing about our open relationship: You know he (J) could leave you if he met someone else, right?

Kate Brown, although well-intentioned, committed a microaggression (or maybe she did intend it). I think the most common stereotype of bisexual people is that they "all are nonmonogamous" and I could see her wanting to ward off any further stigma. In fact, when J and I introduced ourselves and J asked her a question about the experience of being out as bi but in a straight marriage, she again reiterated "but I am monogamous." In person, it felt like information (albeit not relevant to the conversation we were trying to have); in the film, it was an aggression toward people who practice nonmonogamy.

Although I do think her statement was made in the context of highlighting cheating/unethical nonmonogamy, she still asserted monogamy as the moral and social preference over not being monogamous. It was difficult for me, from this point in the film on, to remember the filmmaker's introduction: that this film, while made for the LGBTQ community, was meant to inspire anyone living on society's margins to live authentically and out.

J and I are going to write to Kate Brown (of course we are!) and just tell her how her comment impacted us.

Social Justice & Polyamory Update

I used the power of Reddit to address the recent post I wrote on social justice and polyamory (and dancing). Luckily for all of us, there are smart people out there on the interwebs...

Some excellent points made were:

-Polyamory is a Western framing of ethical nonmonogamy. I remember reading Sex at Dawn and being amazed at the descriptions of cultures where people aren't sexual property of others, where children are raised communally, and where patriarchy doesn't dictate women's bodies. Ethical nonmonogamy has and does exist among many different human cultures, although it may go by different names, have different motivations, and have different forms and practices. Polyamory, though, is a relatively new and certainly Western concept, and thus will fail to capture people in the US and around the world who practice something similar and do not call it the same thing.

[An aside: I also think the term "polyamory," its definition, and its history still try to subvert mainstream meaning by tying "love" to "sex." "Well yes, we can have multiple sexual relationships but these relationships are also about love." Inherently, this discourse shows the attempts in Western history of separating body from heart, of separating dirty sex from pure love, and tries to placate the Puritans still alive that we polyamorists do indeed have love in mind in having multiple relationships.]

-Perhaps the reason that the polyamorous culture looks so homogenous in terms of class and race is because the people that can afford to be out are those with the most privilege (white, middle to upper class)- thus, people engaging in multiple, intimate relationships who are also minorities in other ways (race, class, etc) may be far less able to come out to their families, employers/employees/coworkers, neighbors, and broader communities. I think this is an excellent point (and in fact reminds me of some reading I did recently in which it was mentioned that for many LGBTQ individuals with multiple minority identities, it is sometimes a better approach to not come out as LGBTQ, in order to protect the relationships and communities they already have. I think the same could certainly apply to people with open/ethically nonmonogamous/polyamorous relationships. In fact, conversations in the Facebook group I am part of has shown the diversity in opinions on this topic, and depicts how coming out is a very individual decision dependent on many factors, including diverse community identification and cultural ties.)

-I haven't yet had the opportunity to read this article (The privilege of perversities: race, class and education among polyamorists and kinksters), but it looks pretty delicious. Thank you to the redditor who posted it. I am excited to read it!

Social Justice, Polyamory, and Dancing

As I have been putting together my notes for a project I am presenting on next week, I have had several things rise the surface related to ethical nonmonogamy, stripping, race, and class.

-Something that has been increasingly apparent to me in my explorations, especially academically, around poly issues is the severe lack of discussion on the intersections of race and class with relationship orientation. Being poly is (so far) a distinctly white and upper class experience, although ethically nonmonogamous relationships have been existent in many different cultures around the world. Being poly in such a monoga-normative culture and society means (to me) that you have to (generally) first have your basic needs met and have time to focus on breaking norms before you are able to spend inordinate amounts of time on your relationships (including your relationship with yourself). 

-Interesting, too, has been my discovery that even though disclosing my status as a dancer is nerve-wracking for me depending on my audience, I command a sense of respect and curiosity, typically, and it’s because of my whiteness, my class, and my education level. If I was a woman of color who hadn’t gone to college, I don’t think people would necessarily listen to my story as much. I also think that dancing in Portland is probably one of the most privileged places, geographically, to dance- it is so much more normalized here, and there is a large sex positive community that emphasizes a woman’s right to choose to control her body and feel empowered through her sexuality. Because of my geographic location, race, and socioeconomic status, I feel at least a little comfortable disclosing my experiences dancing. 

I have come across a few different blog posts and articles online about the lack of discussion around race and polyamory, but there is really an overall dearth of discussion. And all I can think of as an explanation is that, so far, ethical nonmonogamy is an experience of wealthy whiteness. If you know of resources related to people of color experience in open relationships, please pass them on!