Host- D. Crew-Lola K.

Cheating isn't a reason for polyamory. Cheating is a symptom of something else.
Can being in denial of a relationship style orientation contribute to cheating absolutely but yeah being poly isn't going to solve those issues even if it's part of the issue

Some of the most fucked up relationship Dynamics we have witnessed have been non-hierarchical.
People turn it into a pissing contest where because they don't use a certain label/structure they believe they're automatically ethical. And baby that ain't it.

Sociologically, ethics or something developed over time and are rooted in very personal philosophical beliefs. But to be ethical is a set of actions. Hierarchy can exist ethically, openly, and honestly.

Recently, we had someone reach out and ask why we don't consider hierarchy in polyamory innately unethical. And that's a very good question...

Millennial and Gen Z women don’t want to be managers — it’s called ‘conscious unbossing’ They're citing burnout, mismatched corporate values and a desire to redefine success on their own terms.

Millennial and Gen Z women don’t want to be managers — it’s called ‘conscious unbossing’

They’re citing burnout, mismatched corporate values and a desire to redefine success on their own terms.
www.thestar.com/life/millenn...

‘Equality is…’ and Other Very Short Verses … the written word can also sing

A few very short poems written by me.
Here's one:

"Sometimes equality is…
Too quiet a word,
Too small a word,
A not-enough word,
A word not able to bear the weight of yesterday,
Not strong enough to carry tomorrow’s visions…
Sometimes equality does not say enough."

folukeafrica.com/equality-is-...

Here are some independent New York City-based news outlets that are free from billionaire influence:

bsky.app/profile/alex...

Post reads: Polyamory food for thought: Does hierarchy mean you are less than, or does it mean there are different dynamics in your relationship? Hierarchy isn't innately unethical. It can be loving, supportive, but only if you communicate openly and honestly over time.

Polyamory food for thought: Does hierarchy mean you are less than, or does it mean there are different dynamics in your relationship?

Being an interracial poly pair means interesting conversations

LETTER FROM THE EDITORS: IDS to continue printing after IU reverses course Our next edition will hit the stands Nov. 20.

Heartened to see Indiana University resume print publication of Indiana Daily Student, dropping bizarre demand that newspaper not print news. I often say I learn from my students. Looks like the student editors of the IDS taught IU leaders something, too. https://loom.ly/JMYaFSU

YouTube video by matsku84 Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri Secret Project: The Planetary Datalinks

One of D's favorite quotes comes Sid Meir's Alpha Centauri:

"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."

youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE?...

We must continue to boldly exist, to argue, to fight, to talk, and to read. Watching short videos isn't enough. We have to engage because that's how we learn.

And when someone says "think of the children", we ask why teaching the children is predatory? We ask how is ignorance thinking of anyone?

The visability of "the other" means discomfort for a lot of folks, on all sides of the aisle. But the difference is how folks respond. People respond with accepting the knowledge of other's existence (bare minimum) or resistance.

We have to fight those who would deny our existence.

Its not just about the queers or the browns either. Insiders have told us the feds are pushing to repeatedly review workplace accommodations ,especially remote work, pre-dating covid 19. They've gutted services specifically aimed at supporting students with disabilities, and group homes.

You will see in them and others a unifying contradictory theme: "I don't want these others to be visible. Why do we have to acknowledge them? Why do they say in our society? We should not normalize their presence in our society. What do you get out of normalizing their existences if you disagree?"

And don't just read it, look at the people backing it who are tied to political groups like Turning Point & Heritage Foundation, ideologues like Stephen Miller, Russell Vought, Peter Navarro, etc. They fundamentally believe society should look white, Christian, able bodied, and upper class.

In the next few years, things are going to get harder bc the goal is reducing and removing what the administration considers undesirable ppl from being visible in every day life and from opportunities that normalize/sustain their existence. That doesn't stop with trans ppl. Read Project 2025

Remember books burned in Germany for a reason. Knowledge of "the other" is a direct threat to social & political control. If you suggest educating people you risk being labelled a predator, or told you must have a nefarious agenda bc to them acknowledgement w/o insult is allowing predation.

And these are super complicated, and messy issues! But make no mistake, nuance is statistically psychologically irrelevant and uncomfortable for the folks who see knowledge and awareness as predatory. Their goal is reduce knowledge, education, and presence of the other.

We're seeing a surge in people loudly proclaiming this attitude on all levels. Not just LGBTQ+ areas. We have ppl saying that defending due process in immigration, that knowing the law, is anti-American. We have people saying research is leftist because acknowledging ethnicity/race is bad knowledge

In the responders mind, recognizing that LGBTQ+ people exist is malicious because to know is to question, to empathize, to discuss. Kids recognizing a classmate has gay parents becomes adults must be predatory and brainwashing because kids shouldn't know about people...so what does it mean?

If you look at that post, we have an individual saying they won't condemn gay parents, will talk to their kids about catholic belief, and questions whether parents don't educate their children about others. The response is insinuating that they must have malicious intent for others' children

The socially conservative interpretation of knowledge is fundamentally that their should be no disagreement. It is why the "snowflake liberal" trope appeals to them, and why so many leftist stereotypes they make rely on the idea that no one like them really disagrees

The most common thing we see in those situations is adults don't want to ask questions and they're terrified of their kids asking questions. Hell, they're even terrified of the idea that a a gay couple will say "We disagree, and that's ok."

We talk about polyamory a lot, and in our respective jobs both see a crapload of people who have been told their "lifestyle" or who they are "is confusing". Meanwhile kids aren't confused, kids are either taught rigidity or not. But the adults don't want to teach

I had to share this reddit post because it perfectly captures the attitudes underlying why some folks are DEEPLY angry that anyone unlike them is visible in the world: They do not want their kids to know different people exist because knowledge is predatory. Knowledge is dangerous.

Here's a decades old fact the tech industry won't tell you: Facial recognition software is less able to accurately detect people of color, specifically darker skin; in some cases it is better with certain Asian demographics bc they're the developer-test subjects. Can we see the problem with this?

How many folks have felt this way?
Excluding everyone.

Sometimes...it's true. As someone who saw kids, as a Black therapist, sometimes that sincerenly made a difference, sometimes I had to tell colleagues the reason their kiddos liked me in passing more than them was I looked like them. It's complex

This is an interesting thing to explore, especially in the context of working with and being in relationships with neurodivergent people because both things can be very true: Patriarchy makes women micro-managers AND their partners may truly not understand and fear getting it wrong