Recognition Not Pathologisation- how bad could it be?

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , , , , 8 Comments

With tomorrow’s International Day of Action for Trans* Depathologisation, there’s a lot of talk going around about why and how we need to recognise trans* people’s legal rights. And I’m struck by how much of a big deal is being made over what is, in essence, the simplest thing.

Ally?

What do we want?

It’s been five years today since Lydia Foy won her case for gender recognition. Five long years. In those five years, we’ve seen the publication of the GRAG report and, uh, very little else. By the sounds of it, gender recognition must be a complicated thing, right? Requiring all sorts of intricate legislative bits and bobs (the technical term) to sort out?

That depends. As with so many things, what it depends on is perspective. It turns out, the complexity of gender recognition legislation seems to depend mainly on whether you see being trans* as a tragic medical condition, or a normal part of human variation that should be recognised. On whether you’re determined to Other trans* people or to acknowledge that gender is a thing that lives between our ears that we get to define any which way we like. Turns out that if we go with the second definition, things get simple really, really quickly.

Legalise Trans*

Medical Tragedies or Self-Definitions

So what is being trans*? Is it a bizarre medical tragedy, an affliction that a small minority of people have to live with? Something a little bit scary that some people ust can’t help but that we should absolutely not be encouraging? Or is it a perfectly normal, if a bit less common than being cis, way to define yourself? And how does the answer to that question change what laws we put in place?

The recommendations of the GRAG report indicate that it tends toward the former definition. Here’s Maman Poulet:

The FF/Green Government formed the Gender Recognition Advisory Group in May 2010 to look at the issues which presented themselves following the Foy case. The group was entirely composed of Civil Servants and even though they received submissions and met with many groups from the rights and LGBT communities it is very evident that they really didn’t get it if an unnamed expert hadn’t told them.

Why was there no Trans rep on committee to at least provide an alternate view if even dissenting one? When the Government formed a group to look at the options for recognition of same sex relationships GLEN got a seat at the table….

The report recommends that Trans People applying for their gender to be recognised will have to have a formal diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder with evidence of medical treatments or will have to have had Gender Reassignment Surgery. This means that one has to have had hormones and mental health treatment and assessment or gender surgery (and hormones and mental health assessment/treatment and everything else)… There is no understanding of the issues facing InterSex here at all..

…The report proposes that there is a panel which people will have to appear before made up of medical and legal representatives and one other where the applicant will will be told if they are a man or woman in the eyes of the state.

I know Trans people who are married and happily so, I know others who are divorced or separated. The report recommends that those applying for Gender Recognition be required to divorce or end their Civil Partnership before they can apply.

Let’s go over that again. In order to change their legal gender, a person would have to:

  • Present a formal diagnosis of GID (defined as a mental illness)
  • Have had medical treatments and/or surgical intervention
  • Appear before a panel of medical and legal representatives to make their case
  • If married, divorce.
  • Oh, and also, because of the definition of GID, you can’t be intersex.

That’s a lot of barriers. You have to be diagnosed as mentally ill. You have to chemically or surgically change your body- which means that gender recognition would be denied to those who, for financial or medical reasons, can’t do this. Never mind bodily integrity. You have to convince a panel of strangers. And if you are happily married, you need to split up your family. And, most bizarrely of all, you need to have a binary-sexed body.

Can I diagnose you too?

I could go into why this is ridiculous, but I’m going to trust that my lovely readers can work that out for yourselves. Instead, I want to show you a different model that is in place right now in Argentina. Let’s check out what TENI have to say about it:

The Argentinian Law is based on self-determination and provides full recognition of self-defined gender identity. Transgender people in Argentina will not need to prove they have had surgical procedures, hormonal therapy or other psychological treatment such as a diagnosis of a mental illness. This law clearly separates a legal right from medical interventions.
This law has been heralded as the most progressive in the world and signals a new era for transgender human rights. Justus Eisfeld, Co-director of Global Action for Trans Equality told press, “The fact that there are no medical requirements at all — no surgery, no hormone treatment and no diagnosis — is a real game changer and completely unique in the world. It is light years ahead of the vast majority of countries.”
However, while clearly separating medical interventions from the legal recognition process, the Argentinian law also provides a right to access any desired medical treatment which firmly enshrines the importance of transgender healthcare.

Huh. Well. Um. That was easy. So in order to get your gender legally recognised in Argentina you have to:

  • Fill out a form. Probably take it in to be stamped by someone because this is a bureaucracy we’re talking about. I’ll bet there’s some queueing involved, so you might want to bring a book.
  • Receive new documentation with correct gender.
  • Continue to be able to freely access whatever medical transition you need to. THIS BIT IS IMPORTANT. Gender diversity is awesome. Gender dysphoria is really, really not, and depathologisation without ensuring access to treatment for dysphoria for everyone who needs it is worse than useless.
  • Have a cup of tea, read the paper, give out about things on the internet, watch TV, go for a run, get on with your life, etcetc.

That last bit, by the way, is optional and can be adapted to your own preferences. As is the first bit. You might prefer a few podcasts to a book.

Note, by the way, how this involves vastly less hassle for everyone than the proposed Irish model. And how it also guarantees any trans* person the right to the transition-related healthcare that they want or need. So what, precisely, is getting in the way of Ireland doing the same? What are we so scared of? What’s the worst that could happen?

Time to do a poodle

If we make it easy to change your gender, everyone will want to do it!

Fearmongers envisage a society where you, me, your ma and your entire secondary school history class are changing our genders like we change our shoes. In my case, that would be as rarely as possible, when the old ones are worn out and full of holes, with an awful lot of grumbling. But I gather that I’m not representative of everyone.

So there we are, with everyone changing their genders whenever the mood strikes them. Down is up, left is right, nobody knows what to call anybody and everyone’s in such a panic that they can’t even remember how to make a nice cuppa anymore.

Shocked woman with a cup of tea
It’s okay, scared lady from the internet. It’ll be fine, I promise.

What nobody seems to have explained is why this would be such a bad thing in the first place. If gender is all about how we identify ourselves, then why shouldn’t we get to change it? Why shouldn’t you, me, your ma and your entire secondary school history class get to cheerfully toddle down to the relevant department, sign a couple of dozen forms, hand over the inevitable fee and then do it all again a few weeks later when they change their mind? Why on earth would that be so terrible?

In fact, it might be pretty great.

For one thing, we’re in a recession here, and changing documents always costs money. Wouldn’t the hordes of people changing their gender markers be a fantastic source of revenue?

For another thing, this scenario inevitably means that people are going to magically forget that they live in a world filled with cissexism and transphobia and instead cheerfully (and with legal recognition) explore all the gender possibilities that they can. Nobody would get to assume just by looking, or by having known what it was last week, that they knew a person’s gender! Asking “what’s your pronoun?” would become as ordinary a question as “Jaysus, will this rain ever stop?”.

Of course, this scenario- as delightful as it is- is ridiculous. I’m sure there are some people in the world who like filling out forms for the lulz. I’m equally sure that it’s a minority sport.

So with that scenario out of the way, what else is there to be scared of?

Dogs And Cats Living Together

Did you notice that in Argentina, there’s no requirement to divorce the person you love in order to get your gender markers changed? That’s because in Argentina, they’ve reinforced their buildings from falling skies and reinforced their umbrellas for downpours of (literal) cats and dogs. All necessary precautions in order to allow same-sex marriage.

Terrifying gays getting married
Under your very nose!

That’s right. If you let trans* people’s genders be recognised without forcing them to get divorced first, you’re going to have a situation where perfectly normal het couples, through a magical process probably involving radioactive spiders, start morphing into gay marrieds. Before your very eyes! WHO WILL BE SAFE? YOUR OWN NEIGHBOURS COULD TURN INTO THE GAYS AT ANY MOMENT.

So, uh, that’d be scary, right? Right? …….right?

What’ll we gain?

Oh, you know. Just little things. Dignity. Trans* people not being forced to out themselves whenever they have to present legal documents. Embracing people for who they are. Honouring bodily integrity and the sovereignty of each of us. Massive symbolic recognition throughout the country.

Little things like that.

Why’re you telling me all this now?

You can’t have forgotten, can you? Tomorrow is the International Day of Action for Trans* Depathologisation! If you’re in Dublin or can get here, and you’re even half as sick as I am of ridiculous, unnecessary barriers put in the way of trans* people’s legal rights, get that (remarkably attractive) ass of yours out to Kildare Street for 2.30pm.

Rally for Recognition Saturday 20th October 2012, 2.30pm

Edited to add a Very Important Thing:

In writing this, I’ve realised- almost instantly after hitting ‘post’- that something that I’ve left out here is anything about gender dysphoria. As I’m running out the door right now, I’m going to leave you with some quotes from the wonderful Quarries & Corridors. Listen up, because this bit’s important!

There’s an incredibly important distinction that needs to be made clearly, front and centre in any debate about depathologising trans people. Having a gender that differs from that assigned to you at birth isn’t illness, it’s the gender dysphoria resulting from this that is. That may seem like semantics, but there is nothing wrong with me for having a nonbinary gender, I used to have gender dysphoria, now treated. Similarly, no one is ill for being a trans man or a trans woman, but the gender dysphoria from not having that recognised and affirmed hurts. The DSM-5 is already removing ‘Gender Identity Disorder’ & replacing it with ‘Gender Dysphoria’, pathologising our dysphoria not our genders. I think this is the right approach. It lets me be transgender without that being seen as disordered, it maintains access to medical care. Anyone making a lot of noise about depathologising trans* without making these important distinctions up front’s likely to do serious damage.

So let’s not forget that, k?

Recognition Not Pathologisation- how bad could it be?
{advertisement}

Marie Stopes in Belfast

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , Leave a comment

” I hope that in Belfast, a network of abortion escorts is being drawn up; people who can meet women accessing the clinic and guide them through the rabble of fascists safely. I hope there’s other measures for safety to counter these affronts on bodily freedom.

And for those of us who are not physically in Northern Ireland, we need to be loud and vocal in our support, and drown out the clamour of those who seek to control our bodies. Speak out about your support for what Marie Stopes are doing in Belfast.”

The clinic in Belfast is opening this afternoon to a barrage of protesters. We’ve got to stand up, speak out, and show our support for the incredible and brave work they’re doing. Let’s be not only louder, but infinitely more compassionate than they could ever be.

Marie Stopes in Belfast

Callout culture, tone trolling and being the Perfect Ally

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , , , , , 14 Comments

This morning, I was linked to a couple of interesting articles, Liberal bullying: Privilege-checking and semantics-scolding as internet sport at the Offbeat Empire, and Pyromaniac Harlot’s The Unicorn Ally. As social justice, communication and the idea of being an ally have been on my mind a lot lately, these provided food for thought. Both authors are people who, like me and like most people, intersect on both sides of the oppressed/ally fence. Both raise some important questions to which I don’t have any easy answers. I’d love a conversation.

Callout culture versus tone trolling- How important are semantics?

In Liberal Bullying, Ariel Meadow Stallings argues that callous culture has become a form of bullying. She sees callout culture as having become a

“new form of online performance art, where internet commenters make public sport of flagging potentially problematic language as insensitive, and gleefully flag authors as needing to check their privilege”

Stallings continues:

“It’s a kind of trolling, with all the politics I agree with, but motivations and execution that turns my stomach. It’s well-intended (SO well-intended), but when the motivations seem to be less about opening dialogue about the issues, and more about performance, righteousness, and intolerance for those who don’t agree with you… well, I’m not on-board.”

There’s so much to unpack here. For one thing, where do we draw the line between tone-trolling and legitimate expressions of anger? People in marginalised groups are often pissed about their marginalisation, and rightly so. Where do we create spaces for safe expression of that anger, and where do we create spaces that are safer for (potential) allies who might need a bit of 101? Whose comfort matters, and where?

I feel uncomfortable expecting perfect behaviour from marginalised people at all times. Holding people to a higher standard is, after all, itself a mechanism of marginalisation. Marginalised folks are expected to be exemplars at all times, to avoid ‘letting the side down’ and showing up the entire group. Additionally, marginalised people are generally subject to far more punitive sanctions for any misbehaviour than their more privileged counterparts.

This doesn’t mean that someone should be let off the hook if they turn out to be a member of a marginalised group. But it does mean that I’m a little uncomfortable with statements like this:

“This is where it starts to feel like the “GOD HATES FAGS!” sign-wavers. While the political sentiments are exactly opposite, the motivations are remarkably similar.”

You don’t get to compare people to a vile hate-group just because you don’t like how they’re acting in your comments section. Doing so feels like godwinning the entire thing.

But I can’t deny that we have a major problem with bullying online. And I can’t deny that internet-pile-ons can get incredibly ugly and disproportionate. If we want to grow our movements and welcome allies among the relatively-privileged, which every movement needs to do, we’ve got to make spaces where people can figure things out.

The ‘Perfect Ally’?

This is where Pyromaniac Harlot’s article comes in. Harlot writes about having a difficult time navigating allyhood and being under immense pressure to be perfect the entire time- something which she feels has been constructed as an impossible standard:

As an ally, my job is to not impose my own beliefs of what’s ‘right’, but instead amplify the voices of the oppressed people that I’m trying to be an ally for. Except that I shouldn’t bug them about educating me, because that’s not what they’re there for. And it’s my duty to talk about the issue of oppression in question, because it’s the job of all of us, rather than the oppressed people, to fix it. Except that when I talk, I shouldn’t be using my privilege to drown out the voices of the oppressed people. Also, I should get everything right, 100% of the time. Including the terminology that the oppressed people in question themselves disagree on.

Should we be really trying to be perfect allies? If there’s one thing that intersectionality teaches us, it’s that things are complicated. We don’t get a nice simple world with easy definitions of right and wrong, privileged and marginalised, ally and enemy. If someone wants me to be their perfect ally all the time, then I’m sorry. It’s not going to happen.

On the other hand, these are questions I ask myself all the time. When I’m working as an ally- which I try to devote a reasonable amount of time to- I’m incredibly conscious of all of the above. I don’t take it personally, though. I don’t choose to be privileged in some respects any more than I choose to be marginalised in others. Things like disagreeing while being an ally are always going to be complicated and difficult.

Privilege and allyhood

A thing I hear a lot is that even if dealing with being called out on privilege sucks, it sucks a hell of a lot less than oppression. A truer statement has rarely been said. But many of our allies also come from marginalised groups. How do we call out people who are relatively privileged but who might also be tired from dealing with their own oppressions, without either being assholes or censoring ourselves? Pyromaniac raises this question:

“I happen to be educated enough to understand varying levels of heavy jargon. I don’t have any conditions that prevent me from reading for hours. I happen to have the luxury of sufficient free time in which to do this. So telling me to go read up on something is kind of ok. But you know what? Most people don’t have that level of luxury. People are busy, you know, surviving themselves. They don’t necessarily have laptops, broadband, and ample time in which to make use of those things.”

This seems like one hell of a question to me, and possibly the most important that I’ve seen in these posts. If our allies are- like most people- oppressed/marginalised themselves in other ways, how do we deal with expectations of perfection or call-out culture? How do our obligations change? This isn’t something that I have any easy answers for.

How about you? What do you think about allyhood, about callout culture, about tone-trolling, about navigating intersections of privilege and oppression in our activism(s)?

Callout culture, tone trolling and being the Perfect Ally

March for TEA this Saturday!

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , , , , Leave a comment

After #meteorshame, who’s feeling like it’s time that we all stood up to be counted in support of Irish trans people’s rights? I sure as hell am. So’s Aisling from Gaelick:

Hey, quick question, what are all you guys doing on the 20th of October? I know where I’m going to be. I will be outside the Dáil from 2.30, getting my protest on. That’s the day of the Rally for Recognition: Identity NOT Disorder.

The rally marks the International Day of Action for Trans* Depathologisation. If that seems like a paragraph full of made up words to you, don’t worry, sit down, I’ll explain it to you..

Rally for Recognition poster

Trans* Education and Advocacy, the organisers of the rally, have this to say:

Being gay used to be a mental illness… being trans* still is.

In 2012, trans* people are still not recognised by the Irish State.

Join TEA at the Rally for Recognition to mark International Day of Action for Trans* Depathologisation on Saturday 20 October 2012 at 2.30pm outside Dáil Éireann, Kildare Street, Dublin 2.

For those of you who can’t get enough of waving clever slogans around, TEA will be making placards from 6.30 tomorrow (Wednesday) evening at the Exchange. Come along! There’ll be tea and biscuits!

March for TEA this Saturday!

#MeteorShame

Aoife O'Riordan, , , 1 Comment

You know Meteor? They’re a mobile phone company here. They have some.. interesting ideas about how it’s appropriate to advertise data plans.

There’s a lot of ways to advertise data plans, I’m sure. Advertising is plainly not my thing, but I’ve seen enough of it to be well aware that there are many creative ways to sell just about anything. Which is why I’m not certain why Meteor decided to do what they did. When you’ve a world of possibilities to choose from, why would it seem like a good idea to mock marginalised groups of people? I can’t say I get it.

And so begins my latest post at Gaelick, Meteoric Mistake. Turns out that, according to Meteor, making a mockery of trans people is absolutely a-okay as long as it reminds people to pick up their new all-you-can-eat data plans. Charming.

Let’s let Meteor know this isn’t okay. Tweet them at @Meteor_Mobile with the hashtag #meteorshame. Make this mistake into one they won’t forget.

 

 

#MeteorShame

Abortion, Reason and The Left: Why Mehdi Hasan is Wrong

Aoife O'Riordan, Leave a comment

GO READ THIS. READ IT NOW. STOP WHAT YOU’RE DOING AND READ THIS ARTICLE OKAY?

After all, as he says, he is standing up for the “member of our society” who most “needs a voice”: namely, “the mute baby in the womb”. And isn’t that what those of us on the left claim to do?Unfortunately for Hasan, this just won’t do. Because what he ignores in this simplistic evocation of the “choice” debates is that women are also “members of our society” who suffer from the lack of “voice”. Women are underrepresented in the media, in parliament; women who do speak out are aggressively silenced by online misogyny – if Hasan thinks today has been bad, I invite him to run my blog for a day. There is of course a difference between physically not being able to speak and psychologically not being able to speak, but to totally ignore the position of women in society when discussing abortion is simplistic to say the least. Less generous souls might call it deceitful.

via Abortion, Reason and The Left: Why Mehdi Hasan is Wrong.

Abortion, Reason and The Left: Why Mehdi Hasan is Wrong

Linkspam me up, Scotty: feminism edition.

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment
Abortion

After the March for Choice the other week, you’d think we’d be done with abortion news for a little while at least. No such luck! Two major abortion-related stories surfaced this week.

UK Secretary of State for Health Jeremy Hunt voiced his support last week for a reduction in the abortion time limit from 12 to 24 weeks. The Abortion Support Network’s Mara Clarke argued that this would adversely affect Irish women, since we tend to have later-term abortions than our UK counterparts.

In an unprecedented move, Marie Stopes will be opening a clinic in Belfast offering medically necessary medical abortions. Abortions! On the island of Ireland! I’ll be expecting the skies to fall and ground to open any minute now. Either that or Irish and Northern Irish women will finally have some, limited, access to life-saving abortions. Ramp.ie agree with me that it’s long overdue. The Donegal Dollop foresee Ryanair protests and Catholic refugee camps springing up on the borders. When faced with Micheal O’Leary on a rampage, I think I might rather the falling skies.

Finally, my own Feminist Ire have a post up on Islamophobia at Dublin’s March for Choice. I hope I’m speaking for more than just myself when I say that, really, I’d prefer to advocate for rights for one group without trampling over the rights of another. As a general rule.

Rape culture, women’s safety, and the right to exist.

I’ve always been of the opinion that my gender is not an excuse to deny me the right to walk or to speak. An opinion shared neither by Jill Meagher’s murderer or Malala Yousafzai’s attacker.

Looking at coverage of the attack on Yousafzai, I can’t help but be frustrated by a common thread in the English-language blogs and articles I’m stuck with reading. It’s been hard to find pieces that don’t talk about how much better things are here in the West. There’s this piece by Nelle. Listen, I’m Irish. That means I’ve got no excuse not to know better. And I’m sick to death of the side-order of Islamophobia with my anti-sexism.

It’s not like things are perfect here. Blaming the victims of sex crimes lets perpetrators off the hook is a response to Jill Meagher’s rape and murder in nice, “safe”, Western Melbourne. Lisa McInerney says that tragic cases don’t need a side of victim-blaming, and Sinead Keogh would like you to know that walking alone at night isn’t a symptom of silliness, thank you.

On a similar note, Crates and Ribbons have been discussing the selective blindness of rape culture and the ‘Kissing Sailor’ photograph. And because it’s impossible to have a reasonable discussion about rape culture on the internet, they followed it up with a post debunking misconceptions.

Miscellany

Robin Ince just became a patron for Dignity in Dying, and explains why.

I believe the desire to live, especially for those who see no glow of an afterlife, is too great for us to just switch off our existence on a whim, as some of those against assisted dying seem to suggest.

In The Monster that therefore I am, Monsterevity talks about monstrousness and mental illness:

Mental illness, while not necessarily taboo in Ireland, is still an issue that others  the person who lives with it.  What I mean by this is that mental illness makes the person who lives with it other to the “normal” people with whom they interact, (often) in the way in which others view them and (always) in the way in which they view themselves.

Progressive Economy argue against government plans to cut child benefit:

 There are three clear features of this payment, which indicate fundamental values and principles: (1) It goes to all children equally; (2) It is paid to all citizens with children regardless of their income, as part of the ‘return on investment’ of taxation and social insurance; and (3) It is a payment from everyone to Ireland’s children, regardless of whether or not they have children of their own.

And finally… back from another globetrotting adventure, Indiana Jones checks his mail and discovers that his bid for tenure has been denied.

Linkspam me up, Scotty: feminism edition.

Top surgery, abortion, and circumcision. (Not at the same time)

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

As I have a ton of real world things to take care of today, have a couple of links:

First, the bad news

It turns out that anti-choice woman-shaming ableist asshats in cassocks are still, well, anti-choice woman-shaming ableist asshats. And where there’s anti-choice ableist women shaming asshats, there’s a blogger giving out about them. In this case me, over at Gaelick! Eh, btw, TW for all the above if you click.

As a pro-choicer, I want a world where nobody is forced or pressured to give birth, every child gets to be raised by parents who love and cherish them dearly, and where nobody feels like their sovereign decisions over their own bodies are something to be ashamed of or punished for.

I’m not the only one outraged. Here’s ickletayto, with far more eloquence than I was able to muster:

It galls me that the religion responsible for perpetrating unspeakable crimes on the children of this nation still sees fit to lecture us on our morality. 

They have no grounds to speak.

Right so. Well. that was unpleasant, wasn’t it?

Something a little more lovely

My friend Nik is raising money for his top surgery fund! His campaign’s been going really well so far, but still has a good way to go. This kind of thing is expensive! Check out his adorkable campaign page, donate if you can, share it either way. And take a look at his delightfully nerdy campaign vid:

And finally..

A long long time ago, I wrote a post on Men’s Rights, Child Mutilation and the Evil Feminist Agenda. Time passed, and I forgot all about it until the other day a couple of comments showed up in my mod feed. While trollish comments normally get trashed to spare my gentle readers, this one challenged me to ‘show some scientific fortitude’ and publish ’em. So I did. Since I have important appointments to watch movies and drink coffee with sexyass queermos today, though, I’m gonna hand dealing with ’em over to You Lot. TW for misogyny, asshattery and and impressive inability to use capital letters. Otherwise, have at it!

Top surgery, abortion, and circumcision. (Not at the same time)

Possibly the greatest spam I have ever seen.

Aoife O'Riordan, , , 1 Comment

There I was, taking a quick glance through my spam folder to see had any genuine comments gotten picked up before deleting it, and I came across this gem:

I just wanted to address something and that’s, your social security number is your slave number and your true identity. The government sees you as a mechanism of productivity for cheap human slave labor to serve the oligarchs. They try to mold you into a by-product of a commodity, to be? used for instrumentation throughout the process of their orchestration. So those set of accomplishments that you lived to get where your at, weren’t really of your own individual success.

I’ve got nothin’. Except that that is one of the greatest things I have ever read.

Possibly the greatest spam I have ever seen.

Making it look easy: Poly

Aoife O'Riordan, , , , 6 Comments

“Wow. You guys are so casual. I wish I could do that!”

Said to me and my Main Bromiga, after I told her to go visit my girlfriend and give her a giant smoooooch right on the lips for me. Because my girlfriend is her girlfriend, who lives in a different city and who the Bromiga’ll be seeing in a couple of days.

Right now, we make it look easy. We tease each other constantly. We rhapsodise about Mutual Girlfriend’s many wonderful qualities. It’s a hell of a lot of fun.

It wasn’t always this easy. We worked to get here. We worked hard. In the beginning, there were weeks of long, difficult conversations. Saying things that were hard to say and hearing things that were harder. There were times when I wondered what the hell I was doing. I wondered if all of this would be worth it in the end. I was scared of hurting myself or either of these people I loved. And we talked more. There were tears, more than once. We spent weeks blindly talking, communicating, trying to figure out where we could all be happy in this unmapped terrain.

People assume that poly people have some kind of magic. That we’re miraculously free of jealousy and insecurities. We’re not, you know. I get jealous at times. I get insecure. So do the people I love. We’re only human, you know? I just talk to the people I love, love them as hard as I can, and trust them as well as I’m able.

And it seems to me that if you do that long enough, things mainly turn out okay.

Making it look easy: Poly