Posted in Cursory Resources, Let's Talk About Poly

Consent is more than saying yes

Consent is more than saying yes.

Consent is having the information to make informed decisions in regards to your autonomy and respect.

Consent in relationships may include understanding your partners’ cognitive differences or ability differences. It may require “extra” communication for various needs.

When dealing with neurodivergent people and other cognitive differences, it is essential to understand the basics of cognition and ignition ability to understand where communication gaps may occur.

Differences can occur in:

❤Verbal comprehension or our ability to understand words, sentences, paragraphs.

❤Sensitivity to problems or our ability to problem-solve.

❤Syllogistic reasoning or drawing conclusions from premises.

❤Number facility or maths-related stuff.

❤Induction or process of making things happen.

❤General reasoning or finding solutions with more math-related stuff.

❤Associative memory or recollection based on information for unrelated things.

❤Span memory or recollection post initial introduction.

❤Associational fluency aka knowing synonyms

❤ Expressional fluency or your ability to convey your thoughts with accuracy.

❤Spontaneous flexibility, aka appropriate situational response.

❤Perceptual speed—Find instances of a pattern under speeded conditions.

❤Visualization or the ability to visualize concepts.

❤Spatial orientation or identifying objects placement in space.

❤Length estimation or the ability to estimate the distance between points.

I have tried to explain this in ways that will make sense to people that don’t study psychology. Please look at the links below and feel free to ask questions.

For more on cognition and cognitive ability:

Posted in Let's Talk About Poly

Valuing commitment does not me tolerating bs…

A person told me they don’t like me as a polyamory advocate because I tell people to leave their partners because I am SoPo, immature, and don’t value commitment.

I find that entire statement to be hilarious because I actually don’t promote this because I personally do not get into relationships unless I have the intention of those relationships to be lifelong relationships.

I do not causally date and I heavily believe in commitments as a solo polyamorous person ( as many SoPos do and want y’all to be clear with us why you think we don’t have commitments). I value my autonomy and negotiate relationships based on this.

I don’t need to negotiate a romantic or queerplatonic relationship with you if I don’t have the intention of doing everything in my power for us to maintain a healthy lasting relationship.

When I go into relationships, I go into it with the intention that we communicate and that we will maintain this lifelong or a long-term relationship as long as maintaining this is not harmful to us.

And when I say maintaining that relationship. I mean that we are evaluating the problems that we are having and why we are having those problems which means maybe we have to go to therapy because we can’t see eye to eye, etc, etc. Ya know.

So why would I ever advocate for people to break up?

I can definitely understand that many ways of relationship-ing do not align with the autonomy and self-advocating that I teach, so that can sound like I want you to break up just because it is hard.

The point is that I advocate that if you’re not able to do the work it may take to recenter your relationship back to health, that it is OK for you to leave.

I advocate that no one is required to stay in a relationship that they do not feel is a good fit for them, period.

I advocate that people should look at their relationships periodically to make sure it’s where they want their relationship to be and that it is healthy, fulfilling, and allowing for their own personal growth and if it’s not to address that. And for some people that means leave. For some, that means loving harder.

To be clear if I see a bunch of red flags and abuse, I’m gonna tell a person that my recommendation would be for them to remove themselves from an unsafe situation.

Removal from an unsafe situation may end the relationship permanently or it may cause individuals to start reevaluating things and seek to become healthier.

My advocacy cannot be to just leave relationships because you find them temporarily unfulfilling because I understand that the nature of humans is that we are not going to be constantly enthralled with the people in our lives at all times.
They will not always be a source of happiness and enjoyment.
Sometimes we are going to “hate” them and dislike them because we may have to make choices that we don’t necessarily want to because we have decided that the person is going to be a part of our lives.

Did you know that it is completely valid and okay to decide that what you negotiate in your relationship at one point no longer works for you?… But it’s not necessarily ok just for you to say well this doesn’t work for me so I’m not gonna act on that anymore without having a conversation with your partner. Sometimes it is sometimes it’s not.

Relationships are about communication, often resource sharing, and partnerships. I recently explained to a tiny child who decided I need to be his big sister, that love is love and relationships are not always simply love. Relationships require interaction. Love is a state of being.

None of that means that you can’t be autonomous and when people start saying that relationships that require them to communicate effectively with their partners ruin their autonomy I also challenge them to consider what they think autonomy, freedom, and control in relationships mean to them.

Posted in Cursory Resources, Let's Talk About Poly

Ethics and Morals

Oh, buddy, I hate this topic with a passion. I recently had a breakup, that despite limited communication due to the tension the discussion invoked, I believe that part of the issue was their heavy belief that ethics are subjective, which is true, but not in the way that was central to the discussion we were having. They were discussing morality. I was discussing ethics. However, due to the interchangeable and colloquial use of ethics and morals, people often don’t understand that they are using the wrong term.

I am sorry, not sorry to inform you all that ethics and morals are not the same, and you must be careful in how you use the term in communication. This is a significant issue in why so many arguments break out. Foundationally ethics are cultural and communal. This also includes subcultures. Morals are individual and are deeply connected to our experiences, nurture, and personal growth. When discussing how actions affect others, both matter; however, the impact is the basis of the term you use.

One of the many communities these conversations occur in is the polyamorous community. The terms consensual nonmonogamy and ethical nonmonogamy are different but also colloquially used interchangeably. Polyamory is distinctly about the ethics of nonmonogamous loving relationships; Not defining love for others; Not telling people how to present that love; Not the priority of certain types of intimacy. It is about the cultural ethics of this specific subset of nonmonogamy. A dictionary definition does not explain the intricacies of cultural expressions and agreement throughout the community. No, quick definition does. The base definitions that float about are introductions not, the full picture of what polyamory is.

I will share some cursory links to help people understand ethics and morals as different terms that cover different relationships to similar central ideas.

What is the difference between Ethics, Morality and the Law?
What’s The Difference Between “Morals” vs. “Ethics”?
What’s the Difference Between Morality and Ethics?
You say morals, I say ethics – what’s the difference?
Ethics, morality, law – what’s the difference?
Compare and contrast “morality” and “ethics.”
Ethics And Morality
An Analysis on Law Vs. Ethics and Morals in a Changing Society
The Battle Between Morality Vs. Ethics: Which One Wins?
Ethics and Morality