I often mention that I am polyamorous. Someone just asked me what that means, so I decided to say here.
This is what polyamoury is for me, there are lots of other versions though.
It means I have learnt by experience that I can be utterly devoted to and in love with not just one person at a time, but several. I am also willing to put in the considerable effort needed to keep more than one partner a time happy and content and in love with me in return, and to give them opportunities to do the same for me.
It also means I am honest with people -- sometimes painfully so -- and expect them to be brave and truthful and willing to try new things. For me, 'good' polyamoury requires that everyone you are having a relationship with knows about everyone else you are having a relationship with. Sometimes they love the people you love too, and that's when it really gets great.
It's not 'cheating' the way I do it, because everyone knows what's happening and has agreed to be involved. Everyone is faithful to the 'tribe of hearts' and supports everyone as best they can, both practically and emotionally.
Having said all that, I am semi-single at the moment and always willing to consider having new people come into my life in a romantic and sexual context.
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Monday, March 02, 2015
What We Call Ourselves and Others
A very interesting day today, doing training on Trans* with the LGF (soon to be the LGBTF).
We started with a briefing on the official modes of address** now to be used within the organisation. The point was made that we shouldn't assume anyone's gender, and it was discussed how to handle telephone calls especially, where voice may suggest gender, but can't be taken as at all conclusive. That we should ask which pronoun** someone wants to use was made clear.
Would you understand that question if asked, though? I'd personally prefer to ask you what title you use - Ms, Miss, Mrs or Mr? Would I be getting the right info though? Do these options cover all bases?
The guidance given to LGBTF staff is to either use a person's [self-selected] name, or 'they'.
(A good quick guide to alternative pronouns can be found here).
Another clear message was never to refer to "The Op", as there are a range of operations trans persons may go through, and not all trans persons "go for the op". Some trans people either don't want to or cannot, due to various health or social issues. Other rude, invasive, irrelevant or prurient questions were also outlined as No-Nos.
We discussed what 'Trans*-inclusivity' means to the organisation. Intersex was mentioned and a reasonable explanation given as to why the organisation has opted to include intersex people within the term 'Trans*'.
All non-binary people are now going to be welcome into any of the LG(BT)F's gendered groups, though there will necessarily be some exceptions, mostly depending on the specific focus of some groups.
It was made very clear as the training progressed that we will endeavour not to promise Trans-inclusion for groups, events or services if we can't deliver them, because to do so is one of the quickest ways to upset and alienate Trans* users. If we can't provide a Trans* aspect somewhere we need just to say so.
My personal feeling is that should be true of the 'B' in LGBT, too.
The Medical and Social aspects of transitioning were explained. The medical process is fairly straight forward, but the culture shock involved in transitioning can be enormous; for example, it was explained how trans women are often horrified to discover they are less heard and less valued in their new gender identity. Likewise, many trans men find it hard to deal with expectations of self-confidence and assertiveness, often having been bullied in the past.
It was also mentioned how capacity for providing treatment is not sufficient to deal with current and future demand. This is set to become a huge challenge, as already waiting lists are frequently twice as long as the target time of 8 months.
The legalities of transitioning and of being Trans* were outlined. One of the earliest required steps to transitioning is changing your name, and apparently twelve documents evidencing your name change are required before you can proceed further along the route to obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (if indeed you want one). Especially noteworthy is the fact that you DO NOT have to tell an employer about having changed identity or having lived under another name in the past, though there could be complications associated with providing references. The online system for obtaining a DBS check already accomodates those who have, or are in the process of, transitioning.
There was loads more too, but I think this gives a good flavour of what we were taught today. The presenters were excellent and were able to speak directly from personal experience. The training was intensive and left me, personally, with lots to contemplate.
We started with a briefing on the official modes of address** now to be used within the organisation. The point was made that we shouldn't assume anyone's gender, and it was discussed how to handle telephone calls especially, where voice may suggest gender, but can't be taken as at all conclusive. That we should ask which pronoun** someone wants to use was made clear.
Would you understand that question if asked, though? I'd personally prefer to ask you what title you use - Ms, Miss, Mrs or Mr? Would I be getting the right info though? Do these options cover all bases?
The guidance given to LGBTF staff is to either use a person's [self-selected] name, or 'they'.
(A good quick guide to alternative pronouns can be found here).
Another clear message was never to refer to "The Op", as there are a range of operations trans persons may go through, and not all trans persons "go for the op". Some trans people either don't want to or cannot, due to various health or social issues. Other rude, invasive, irrelevant or prurient questions were also outlined as No-Nos.
We discussed what 'Trans*-inclusivity' means to the organisation. Intersex was mentioned and a reasonable explanation given as to why the organisation has opted to include intersex people within the term 'Trans*'.
All non-binary people are now going to be welcome into any of the LG(BT)F's gendered groups, though there will necessarily be some exceptions, mostly depending on the specific focus of some groups.
It was made very clear as the training progressed that we will endeavour not to promise Trans-inclusion for groups, events or services if we can't deliver them, because to do so is one of the quickest ways to upset and alienate Trans* users. If we can't provide a Trans* aspect somewhere we need just to say so.
My personal feeling is that should be true of the 'B' in LGBT, too.
The Medical and Social aspects of transitioning were explained. The medical process is fairly straight forward, but the culture shock involved in transitioning can be enormous; for example, it was explained how trans women are often horrified to discover they are less heard and less valued in their new gender identity. Likewise, many trans men find it hard to deal with expectations of self-confidence and assertiveness, often having been bullied in the past.
It was also mentioned how capacity for providing treatment is not sufficient to deal with current and future demand. This is set to become a huge challenge, as already waiting lists are frequently twice as long as the target time of 8 months.
The legalities of transitioning and of being Trans* were outlined. One of the earliest required steps to transitioning is changing your name, and apparently twelve documents evidencing your name change are required before you can proceed further along the route to obtaining a Gender Recognition Certificate (if indeed you want one). Especially noteworthy is the fact that you DO NOT have to tell an employer about having changed identity or having lived under another name in the past, though there could be complications associated with providing references. The online system for obtaining a DBS check already accomodates those who have, or are in the process of, transitioning.
There was loads more too, but I think this gives a good flavour of what we were taught today. The presenters were excellent and were able to speak directly from personal experience. The training was intensive and left me, personally, with lots to contemplate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)