
kappes
 the theory and practice of having more than one love.


Archive-name: polyamory/faq
Please-Note: Comments on the contents should go to 
<elise@soils.umn.edu>.
 Comments on the header should go to <pjkappes@mailbox.syr.edu>,
 who is providing automatic posting services for the maintainer.

 The Alt.polyamory Faq

Table of Contents:

 2). What's polyamory, then?
 3). But isn't that "cheating"?
 4). Primaries, secondaries, vees and triads: polyjargon and 
polygeometry
 5). What about jealousy?
 6). Are there rules for being polyamorous?
 7). How do you decide who sleeps where when?
 8). Why do some posts talk about Hot Bi Babes? (and where can I
 get one?)
 9). Are all polyfolk bisexual?
 10). Do polyamorous relationships last?
 11). How can I tell if I am polyamorous?
 12). What about living together and commitment and marriage and
 all that?
 13). What will the children think?
 14). How does a person start (or continue) a poly relationship?
 15). How do I explain this to people?

Administrivia:

 Okay, this is version 2.2. I also need to include a list of
 other newsgroups and mailing lists of interest; got one? Juan
 has reformatted this to proper net.style, for which we thank him.

 Hope this is useful. Please feel free to send comments directly
 to me and/or post 'em to the newsgroup as you choose.

 As always, I apologize for any errors, inadvertent or gratuitous.

 Yours in service to truth, beauty, and eleemosynary wordsmithery,
 I remain,

 Elise

----------------------------------------------------------------------


 Alt.polyamory is a USENET newsgroup more or less full of people
 interested in talking about polyamory and related topics.

 Alt.polyamory was founded by Jennifer Wesp on May 29, 1992. 

------------------------------


 (Glad you asked that. ;-) ) Polyamory means "loving more than
 one". This love may be sexual, emotional, spiritual, or any
 combination thereof, according to the desires and agreements of
 the individuals involved, but you needn't wear yourself out
 trying to figure out ways to fit fondness for apple pie, or
 filial piety, or a passion for the Saint Paul Saints baseball
 club into it. "Polyamorous" is also used as a descriptive term by
 people who are open to more than one relationship even if they
 are not currently involved in more than one. (Heck, some are
 involved in less than one.) Some people think the definition is
 a bit loose, but it's got to be fairly roomy to fit the wide
 range of poly arrangements out there.
 
------------------------------


 Nope.

 Oh, you wanted a longer answer. Okay. According to the OED,
 cheating means "fraud, deceit, swindling." There's a nice quote
 from 1532: "The first...ground of Chetinge is...a studdy to seme
 to be, and not to be in deede." In other words, cheating is to
 convey through deliberate action the impression that one is of a
 particular nature while one is, in fact, something quite
 different. What this boils down to with polyamory is that
 polyamorous people do not tell partners, lovers, or prospective
 members of those groups that they are monogamous when in fact
 they are not -- nor do they allow these people to assume they are
 monogamous, regardless of how convenient or personally
 advantageous such assumptions might be. The words "honest",
 "negotiate", "communication" and "being out" occur frequently in
 discussions of how polyamory usually works.

 As Stef puts it: 

 "I think the key in defining polyamory is *openness*, that is,
 having multiple relationships with the knowledge and consent of
 your partner(s) rather than by deceit. (How much openness, how
 many details are shared, of course varies widely.) A great many
 people have secret affairs while they're in a supposedly
 monogamous relationship. I think those people might have the
 potential to be polyamorous, but I do not think they are
 practicing polyamory. Another key in defining polyamory, IMO, is
 that it need not involve sex (although it often does)."

 Generally speaking, if someone openly practices "more than one
 love" and calls themself polyamorous, they probably are; if they
 practice "more than one love" and call themself monogamous, do
 not adjust your television: the problem is *not* in your
 receiver.

------------------------------

 polygeometry

 Since there are lots of different ways to organize (or not
 organize, if one is blessed by the Goddess of Chaos, or has a
 taste for happy anarchy, or is a principled egalitarian)
 relationships, it follows that there are ways of describing these
 various arrangements. This polyjargon has evolved in the
 newsgroup over time, and the words are merely descriptives. No
 approval or disapproval of any particular arrangement is to be
 expressed or implied.

 Primary - word often used in a hierarchal multi-person
 relationship to denote the person with whom one is most strongly
 bonded. In some cases this bond or commitment takes the form of
 legal marriage. As bigamy is not legal, the option of having two
 (or more) legally wedded primaries simultaneously is not
 currently practicable, though non-legal ceremonies may certainly
 be performed. In some cases "primary" refers to the lover with
 the most seniority.

 Secondary - follows from primary, in a hierarchal relationship,
 denotes a person with whom one is involved without the emotional,
 legal, or economic complexities and commitments of primary
 bonding.

 Yes, some people talk about tertiaries and so on. Some people
 also don't like the terms primaries and secondaries or the
 concepts behind the terms, preferring to have "a circle of
 equals" as one poly person called it. Stef contributed the term
 "Non-hierarchical Polyamory" for this kind of arrangement.

 Triads - three people involved in some way. Often used in a
 fairly committed sense, in some cases involving ceremonies of
 commitment, but also used simply to mean "three people who are
 connected". Example: "Jodine, Mischa and Mickey are a FMM triad
 living in Excelsior."

 Vee - Three people, where the structure puts one person at the
 bottom, or "hinge" of the vee, also called the pivot point. In a
 vee, the arm partners are not as commonly close to each other as
 each is to the pivot.

 Triangle (or equilateral triangle) - relationship where three
 people are each involved with both of the others. Sometimes also
 called a triad.

 Line Marriage - term from the works of Robert A. Heinlein,
 science fiction writer, meaning a marriage that from time to time
 adds younger members, eventually establishing an equilibrium
 population (spouses dying off at the same rate as new ones are
 added). This is a different form of familial immortality than
 the traditional one of successive generations of children.
 (Definition courtesy of M. Schafer, and yes, there are people who
 are in situations like this who use the term to describe their
 family.)

 Polyfidelity: Relationship involving more than two people who
 have made a commitment to keep the sexual activity within the
 group and not have outside partners. (Rumor has it that this
 term was coined by the group Kerista.)

 Quads, pentacles, sextets and more: There are polyfolk who exist
 in multiple arrangements with more than three members. Geometry
 can get complicated, and creative nomenclature abounds. As in
 every other aspect of polyamory, the precise bonds of intimacy
 vary from group to group and from member to member within groups.

------------------------------


 Some people seem to have no jealousy; it's as if they didn't get
 that piece installed at the factory. Others, including some
 long-term polyamorists, feel jealousy, which they regard as a
 signal that something needs investigation and care, much as they
 would regard depression or pain. Jealousy is neither a proof of
 love (and this is where polyamory differs from possessive or
 insecure monogamy) nor a moral failing (and this is where
 polyamory differs from emotionally manipulating one's partner(s)
 into relationships for which they are not ready).

------------------------------


 Nobody has a trademark on How It's Done, if that's what you mean.
 The best anyone can do is tell how it works for them, and as with
 most other things, YMMV. (That means "Your Mileage May Vary.")

 Some people have "rules of thumb".

 Elf and Omaha:

 "I will play safe.
 I will come home."

 Joe and Kat:

 "Your needs come first.
 We'll talk about everything.
 What they said."


 Elise:

 "Since a certain 'learning experience' I have felt strongly
 that I should never allow my relationship with a new person
 to be a tool used to avoid dealing with a 'broken' other
 relationship. In fact, one of the things I am most careful
 about is 'emotional spillover'; I have a policy of not
 spending intense time with otherloves when there is something
 out of balance with one love. Naturally this tends to speed
 up the opening of negotiations about the difficulty. ;-) I
 think it's unfair to my loves to use the time I spend with
 them as a palliative when there's trouble elsewhere; it keeps
 me from doing the work I need to do, the work I agreed to do
 when I took on the reality of the relationship."

 If you want rules of thumb, you get to make them up yourself. No
 warranty expressed or implied, and keep checking the instrument
 panel throughout your flight.

------------------------------


 This is the most often asked question in panel discussions of
 polyamory, making some polyfolk wonder why sex is more
 interesting than the emotional and other intimacies of
 polyamorous life. The answer is that the people involved decide,
 and they decide *how* they decide, too. Some people have
 conferences and divide up the week, some people all pile happily
 into one big bed, and for all I know some people spin a big wheel
 with blinking lights on it each evening....and some people can
 love one another, have no sex, and choose to live in separate
 homes if that is most comfortable for them. The answer usually
 evolves out of discussion, empathy and practice, which makes it a
 lot like good lovemaking.

 As jack says:

 "The thing to remember is that the sexuality of a relationship is
 not the most important aspect of it. The best thing I can do for
 either of my partners is meet them at the door with a buttered
 biscuit and a smile."

------------------------------


 It's a newsgroup joke referring to the occasional post from
 someone, almost always identifying himself as a straight male,
 who is seeking "hot" (i.e. sexually arousing) bisexual female
 partners to save him from the monotonies of the back rack at his
 local video rental shop. The term Hot Bi Babe is almost always
 used sarcastically, occasionally by those of us who really are
 hot bi babes, to lampoon those who regard our sexual preferences
 as a spectator sport. (Our crankiness has more to do with the
 frequency and ineptitude of clueless approaches than it does with
 the acceptability of fantasies or anything like that.)

 (and where can I get some?)

 cards and letters.

------------------------------


 No. There are many polyamorous people who are also bisexual, and
 many who are monosexual (i.e. relating only to one gender as
 potential or actual sexual/romantic partners; straight or
 gay/lesbian). There are also lots of folks who don't do sexual
 preference/orientation labels at all. One doesn't always know
 until one asks, as with so many other things. Avoiding
 assumptions is usually worth the exercise.

------------------------------


 Some do, some don't, just like any other kind of relationships.
 Some folks on the newsgroup have been together for many years;
 some own houses and have children together. Being polyamorous is
 no guarantee that relationships will be easier, though there can
 be advantages to shared joys and shared sorrows, as the old
 saying goes.

------------------------------


 I'm not sure; only you will know, and according to the philosophy
 of some folks, people aren't polyamorous, although behavior can
 be. Some people find that approach useful, and others prefer to
 think of "polyamorous people".
 
 Some polyfolk tend to recognize themselves in the descriptions,
 and can only be restrained with difficulty from jumping up and
 down and screeching, "See! See! I *knew* it wasn't just me!
 Hooray!" If you aren't sure you're poly, the best practice is
 probably to act kindly and responsibly, and to communicate
 clearly to the best of your ability as you learn; come to think
 of it, that's the best practice for polyfolk, too, so you'll be
 one of the crowd anyhow. Besides, being polyamorous is not
 inherently "better" than being monogamous, so there's no need to
 feel like you have to pledge allegiance or anything like that
 just to hang out and look at the questions.

 Another thing to consider is that the word "polyamorous" is, like
 all labels, just a tool. What you do and how you treat the
 people you love is probably more important to them, in the long
 run, than whether you fit a particular descriptive term, so don't
 sweat it, okay? And take good care of each other.

 Andy Latto took issue with the concept of "being polyamorous,"
 and what he had to say was pretty interesting:

 "There aren't polyamorous and monogamous people; there are
 polyamorous and monogamous relationships. The same person may
 at various times be happy in both monogamous and polyamorous
 relationships at various times in his/her life. What is right
 depends on you and your feelings, and the feelings of those
 you are involved in relationships with. You may at some times
 be involved in a relationship that is monogamous, and that
 may be the right thing for the people in that relationship;
 at other times, you may be in a relationship which works
 better as part of a polyamorous network of relationships. In
 any case, the important thing is probably to act kindly and
 responsibly, and to communicate clearly with intimate
 partners and potential partners about these issues. Don't
 deny your feelings or the feelings of those that you care
 about. Get in touch with how you and those you care about
 really feel, rather than how society wants you to feel, or
 how you think it would be logical to feel, or how you've been
 told polyamorous people (or monogamous people) should
 feel. Then behave in ways which are honest, and which make
 you, and the people you care about, and the people they care
 about, happy and fulfilled. If this results in you having
 more than one intimate relationship at the same time, or
 being involved in a relationship with more than two people,
 those who are big on categorizing and labeling people will
 label you a 'poly person'."

------------------------------

 and all that?

 Good question. Ask it; there are many many approaches among the
 people on the newsgroup. From cohousing to communal living to
 group marriage to things-undreamed, there are a multitude of
 ways. Design a new one and see how it works. Unlearn assumptions
 about an old arrangement. Ask questions, and practice empathy.

 Most of all, polyamory seems to be about building new
 configurations of relationships rather than trading people in and
 out like baseball cards. As amanda r. clark says:

 "Poly is being open to the opportunity if it comes along, not


 

(Continued from last message)
 refusing commitments because something better might come
 loping down the path."

------------------------------


 As Martin Schafer says:

 "If you don't think you are doing anything wrong, and can
 honestly explain that, they'll probably think it's pretty
 neat. For some of us having more people involved in child
 rearing is a big practical benefit of our lifestyle. The
 details of how this works is a fertile topic for discussion,
 both here and among the individuals involved."

------------------------------

 relationship?

 First, there are no rules. Nobody owns the copyright on
 polyamory. You get to build your own to fit you and your
 dearloves.

 One thing that comes up in every conversation about polyamory is
 communication. If there is any basic building block, this is
 probably it. If you can talk about your hopes, you're on the way
 to realizing them.

 If you're in a relationship already, and have not talked about
 how you feel and what you want, and you're asking the question
 "How do I start doing this poly stuff?", you may have some qualms
 about talking to your partner. What you do will have to be
 determined by your own ethics and your own situation; chances are
 that if you ask on the newsgroup, many polyfolk will suggest you
 talk it over with your partner, and they may point out that even
 if you two do not decide to live polyamorously, you may very well
 increase the intimacy level in your monogamous dyad by having the
 discussion. 

 On the other hand, it may all go blooey, and this is why people
 hesitate. On the third hand, nothing ventured, nothing gained.
 On the fourth hand, it might be useful to increase the intimacy
 level in the existing relationship and address any outstanding
 difficult issues there *before* having this particular
 discussion. Four more hands and you've got a nice statue of Kwan
 Yin there, and seeing as how she's the Goddess of Mercy, she
 might come in handy at a time like this.

 Joe Avins feels that it's not a good idea to try to force a
 relationship into an attractive model; he favors the "relax, be
 open, and see what happens" approach, and quotes Pete Seeger:
 "Take it easy, but take it."

 If you're already in more than one relationship and haven't
 disclosed this yet, you will find people on the newsgroup who
 have experienced similar things - from all three sides - and are
 willing to discuss their perceptions and the actions they took.

------------------------------


 David Rostcheck says:

 "You don't have to explain yourself at all, or answer to
 anyone. You're happy. Your feelings require no
 justification. It's a mistake to try to reconcile what you
 feel with a social classification, because the classification
 may not really suit you. You start with your feelings,
 understand them and be comfortable with them. You, your
 feeling, and the people you care about are the important
 things. You're getting in this unnatural, inverted position
 of trying to explain yourself. You don't have to explain
 yourself to the world. You just are, and your relationship
 just is. If other people want to understand it, then you try
 to explain to them in basic terms what you feel, and that
 you're happy.

 "Here's how I'd deal with some specific questions:

 ":Are you seeing my daughter or this other girl?
 I'm seeing them both.

 ":So you're cheating on her?
 No. They both know; we're all friends and we're happy that
 way.

 ":Well, which do you love?
 I love them both.

 ":Which do you love more?
 I don't understand the question. They're different
 people. How do you measure?

 ":Why don't you commit to one of them?
 Why can't I commit to both of them?

 "See? You don't have to bend over backwards to express
 yourself in their terms. They may have to learn your terms to
 understand you. You're not the one who doesn't understand;
 they have to put in the work to comprehend you. Remember, the
 bunch of you have something that comes naturally and feels
 right for you; whether or not other people get it is a
 secondary issue. As long as you do what you want you'll be
 happy.

 "Does that help any?"


------------------------------


 Not that I know of. ;-) There are several proposed symbols, of
 which the most common seems to be the parrot. As parrot pins and
 other ornaments are relatively easy to find, this symbol seems
 likely to catch on over the others. It also has the advantage of
 being humorous, which is a needed quality in such a staid,
 on stun.)

------------------------------

************************



 

kappes
 polyamorous relationships. With proper application and
 ingenuity, these methods may impair or destroy monogamous
 relationships as well; they're truly multipurpose tools.


Archive-name: polyamory/faq-supplement
Please-Note: Comments on the contents should go to 
<elise@soils.umn.edu>.
 Comments on the header should go to <pjkappes@mailbox.syr.edu>,
 who is providing automatic posting services for the maintainer.
Last-Modified: 07/22/94

 Alt.polyamory FAQ - the first supplement

How to f*** up

 The preceding list of answers to questions about polyamory is not a
guide to how to have a working polyamorous relationship, although we
have strong anecdotal evidence that the tools mentioned are useful in
all sorts of relationships, mono and poly. We do, however, have the
following guide of carefully tested methods for making mistakes in
polyamorous relationships. With proper application and ingenuity,
these methods may impair or destroy monogamous relationships as well;
they're truly multipurpose tools. We post this listing for your
consideration; no liability expressed or implied.

1. Lie. This is basic and effective. To maximize bad results, lie
about something important to the other person(s) and arrange to be
caught in the lie in such a way as to produce maximum shock.
Additional stress points awarded for keeping the lie going for a while
before discovery, which increases the disorientation and sense of
betrayal in the deceived person(s). Lying about sex gets double
points. Lying about being married gets triple f***-up
points. Creative lies of omission (i.e. "not telling") with fancy
rationalizations and condescension get gold stars.

2. Avoid self-knowledge. This is more elegant than strategy 1, as it
combines a bold sweep of denial with sorties of distraction aimed at
oneself. This tactic is most effective when combined with tactics 3
and 4. Self-destructive or addictive behaviour has also been found
very effective in avoiding self-knowledge by our researchers. When
combined with an endearing attitude of helplessness, this strategy has
been proven efficacious in attracting "rescuers" or "white knights" on
whom one can then practice strategies 4 and 3, in that order.

3. Blame the other person(s). If anything went wrong, hey, it must be
their fault, right? This eliminates the need for messy things like
communication and negotiation, which can be embarrassing, particularly
if one is using strategy 2.

4. Disclaim responsibility. This is a little more complex than
strategy 3, and often includes what is referred to as "codependency".
The classic way to play this strategy is to cater to the partner(s)
involved while repressing one's own desires and questions. This
allows a good head of resentment to build up, and one can justify
anger by saying one has done so *much* for one's partner(s) and gets
no thanks, etc. In its most refined state, this strategy makes the
other person(s) responsible for setting the direction, pace and
content of the relationship, for which one can them blame them if
one's own expectations or needs are not met. Using strategy 2 to
avoid knowledge of these expectations and needs gets double points.

5. Push. This is an art, albeit a crude one. When augmented with
strategy 6, pushing can achieve spectacular negative results in even a
short time. Remember, when pushing, only *your* satisfaction counts!
It's a dog eat dog world, and you're a pit bull. Emotional and mental
bullying can be as satisfying as old-fashioned physical coercion, and
not nearly as easily prosecutable.

6. Play on insecurity. This is an old favorite. Using sexual
insecurity as a weapon and combining this with strategy 5 is a
four-star winner. Attempting to control one's partner(s) by
manipulating them through their insecurities is a sure-fire f***-up
tactic. It's so much more delicate than simply beating them up, too,
though the resultant emotional damage can be remarkably similar.

7. Avoid intimacy. This may seem paradoxical; after all, we're
talking about getting up-close and personal with as many hot bi babes
-- er, ahem -- we're discussing achieving satisfyingly close
relationships with a number of people, right? The trick of avoiding
intimacy can be performed in several ways, but the easiest is to
confuse intimacy with "rubbing slippery bits together". Substitute
the words "sex" and "love" for each other often in conversations.
Repeat the mantra, "If you loved me, you'd know what I want."
Practice strategy 8 assiduously, supplementing it with strategy 2.
According to the needs of the moment, figure out whether action or
words are more likely to be ambiguous or misconstrued, and go with
what gives you the most plausible deniability later. Some
exceptionally talented individuals manage to give the impression of
being intimate while successfully remaining stone-cold. Study sales
techniques for pointers. People with good "lines" fall into this
category, especially if the lines include explanations of how they
truly *value* the other person.

8. Don't talk. Talking has been known to lead to communication if
practiced carelessly. Communication will seriously impair your
f***-up progress, and in certain cases will halt or reverse it
entirely. If you *must* talk, use cliches and quotations from popular
songs as much as possible, or fall back on strategy number 1.

If all else fails, make a safer-sex agreement with your partner(s) and
then break it, contracting a communicable disease about which you do
not then tell them. Double points for avoiding all discussion or
negotiation of sexual matters entirely so that the "agreement" is
wishful thinking and completely deniable. For a coup de grace, add
strategy 6 and tell them it wouldn't have happened if they had been
satisfying you like they were supposed to.

9. For the ultimate metaf***-up, remain technically faithful to your
partner while breaking the spirit of whatever agreement you have
whenever possible, keeping this knowledge bottled up to ensure maximum
fear, shame and resentment. Some people win the grand prize with the
figleaf-and-stinging-nettle cluster for self-inflicted suffering and
wasted potential by managing to keep this strategy up until death do
them part, concealing from their spouse the fact that they have been
shamming happiness all these years.

********************************************************************
Whew! Yuck! You know, writing those sure took me down memory lane.
What I hoped to do with this little icky essay was illustrate the flip
side of some of the tools in the toolbox for healthy poly (and other)
relationships. These "bad tools" are humorous (pretty bent humor,
too), but the good tools are serious.

 

kappes
 entertainment


Archive-name: polyamory/culture
Please-Note: Comments on the contents should go to 
<holly@sun.sws.uiuc.edu>.
 Comments on the header should go to <pjkappes@mailbox.syr.edu>,
 who is providing automatic posting services for the maintainer.
Last-Modified: Mon, Jan 30, 1995

 The Alt.polyamory FAQ
 Culture Supplement

1.) Poly Non-fiction

2.) Poly Fiction

3.) Poly Movies

4.) Poly Songs

5.) Other Poly Creativeness

6.) Poly Organizations


Key to symbols: * indicates level of poly in piece
 ! indicates poly friendliness of piece
 
For further information on books on this list, you can telnet the 
Library of Congress at dra.com or locis.loc.gov


1.) Poly Non-fiction

 ***** !!!!! Deborah Anapol, "Love Without Limits" (see IRC listing 
under
 organizations)
 ***** !!!!! M. L. Carden, "Oneida: Utopian Community to Modern
 Corporation"
 ***** ! Audrey Chapman, "Mansharing: Dilemma or Choice"
 ***** !!!! G. Clanton & C. Downing, "Face to Face to Face"
 ***** !! L. & J. Constantine, "Group Marriage"
 *** !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "Heavenly Breakfast"
 *** !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "The Motion of Light in Water"
 ** !!!! Helen Fisher, "Anatomy of Love"
 * ! Arno Karlen, "Threesomes: Studies in Sex, Power, and
 Intimacy"
 ***** !!!!! Aidan A. Kelly (ed), "The New Polygamy: The Polyamorous
 Lifestyle as a New Spiritual Path."
 *** !!! R. Libby & R. Whitehurst, "Marriage and Alternatives:
 Exploring Intimate Relationships"
 *** !!! Spencer Klaw, "Without Sin"
 *** !!! R. Mazur, "The New Intimacy: Open Marriages and 
Alternative 
 Lifestyles"
 ** ! Peter McWilliams, "Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do: The
 Absurdity of Consentual Crimes in a Free Society"
 ***** !!!!! Ryam Nearing, "Loving More: The Polyfidelity Primer"
 (see PEP listing under organizations)
 ** !!! Anais Nin, "The Diaries of Anais Nin"
 **** !!!!! Nena and George O'Neill, "Open Marriage"
 *** n/a "The Pillow Book" (erotic art from India, China, and 
Japan)
 *** !!! James Ramey, "Intimate Friendships"
 *** !!! Carl Rogers, "Becoming Partners: Marriage and Its
 Alternatives"
 ** !!!! Bertrand Russell, "Marriage and Morals"
 ***** !!! Gay Talese, "Thy Neighbor's Wife"
 *** !! Robert Thamm, "Beyond Marriage and the Nuclear Family"


1.) Poly Fiction

 * ! Isabel Allende, "Eva Luna"
 *** !! Thea Alexander, "2150 AD"
 ** !! Wilhelmina Baird, "Crashcourse"
 ** !!! Wilhelmina Baird, "Clipjoint"
 *** !!! John Dudley Ball, "Chief Tallon and the S.O.R."
 *** !!! M. A. R. Barker, "Flamesong"
 *** !!! M. A. R. Barker, "Man of Gold"
 **** !!!! Gael Baudino, "Gossamer Axe"
 **** !!!!! Amy Bloom, "Love is Not a Pie", short story
 *** !!!! Marion Zimmer Bradley, "The Forbidden Tower"
 ** !! Rita Mae Brown, "Six of One"
 ** !! Orson Scott Card, "Saints"
 ** !!! Ernest Callenbach, "Ecotopia"
 ** !!! Ernest Callenbach, "Ecotopia Emerging"
 ** !! Robertson Davies, "Fifth Business"
 ** !! Robertson Davies, "Leaven of Malice"
 ** !! Robertson Davies, "Lyre of Orpheus"
 ** !! Robertson Davies, "World of Wonders"
 ** !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "Babel-17"
 * !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "Dhalgren"
 *** !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "The Mad Man"
 ** !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "Stars in My Pocket Like Grains of 
Sand" 
 ** !!!!! Samuel R. Delany, "Triton"
 ** !!! Wayne Dyer, "Gifts From Eykis"
 *** !!! Goethe, "Wahlverwandschaften"
 *** !!! Robert Graves, "Goodbye to All That"
 *** !!! Robert Graves, "Watch the North Wind Rise"
 * !! Andrew Harvey, "Burning Houses"
 ** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Beyond This Horizon"
 ** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "The Cat Who Walked Through Walls"
 ** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Friday"
 *** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Glory Road"
 ** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Gulf"
 **** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "I Will Fear No Evil"
 *** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Methuselah's Children"
 ** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress"
 *** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "The Number of the Beast"
 *** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "To Sail Beyond the Sunset"
 **** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Stranger in a Strange Land"
 **** !!!!! Robert Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love"
 * !!! John Irving, "The World According to Garp"
 *** !! Mercedes Lackey & Ellen Guon, "Knight of Ghosts and 
Shadows"
 * !! Mercedes Lackey & Ellen Guon, "Summoned to Tourney" 
 ** !!!! Doris Lessing, "The Marriages Between Zones Three, Four, 
 and Five" 
 *** !! Elizabeth Lynn, "The Dancers of Arun"
 *** !! Elizabeth Lynn, "A Different Light" 
 *** !! Elizabeth Lynn, "The Sardonyx Net"
 **** !!!! Donald Kingsbury, "Courtship Rite" ("Geta" in the UK)
 **** ! Milan Kundera, "The Unbearable Lightness of Being"
 *** !!! Michael P. Kube-McDowell, "The Quiet Pools"
 **** !!!! Larry McMurty, "Leaving Cheyenne"
 ** !!! Vonda McIntyre, "Starfarers"
 ** !!! Vonda McIntyre, "Transition"
 ** !!! Vonda McIntyre, "Metaphase"
 * !!!!! Shirley Meier, "Shadow's Daughter"
 * ! Vladimir Nabokov, "Ada"
 **** ! Maxine Paetro, "Manshare"
 * !!! David Palmer, "Emergence"
 **** !!!! Marge Piercy, "The High Cost of Living"
 *** !! Marge Piercy, "Woman on the Edge of Time"
 *** !!! Marge Piercy, "Summer People"
 **** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "Come Live My Life"
 **** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "The Harrad Experiment"
 *** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "The Immoral Reverend"
 *** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "The Love Exchange"
 *** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "Premar Experiments"
 *** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "Proposition 31"
 *** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "The Rebellion of Yale Marrat"
 **** !!!!! Robert Rimmer, "Thursday My Love"
 ** !! Elizabeth Scarbourough, "The Harem of Aman Akbar"
 ** !!! Melissa Scott, "The Empress of Earth"
 ** !!! Melissa Scott, "The Five-Twelfths of Heaven"
 ** !!! Melissa Scott, "Silence in Solitude"
 *** !!!!! Starhawk, "The Fifth Sacred Thing"
 * !!!!! S. M. Stirling, "Snow Brother"
 **** !!!!! S. M. Stirling & Shirley Meier, "The Cage"
 * !!!!! S. M. Stirling & Shirley Meier, "Saber and Shadow"
 *** !!!!! S. M. Stirling, Shirley Meier, & Karen Wehrstein, 
"Shadow's
 Son"
 ** !!! John Varley, Gaia trilogy; "Demon", "Titan", "Wizard"
 ** !!! John Varley, "The Persistance of Vision"
 ** !!! Joan D. Vinge, "The Outcasts of Heaven's Gate"
 ** !!! Alice Walker, "The Temple of My Familiar"
 **** !!!!! Karen Wehrstein, "Lion's Heart"
 **** !!!!! Karen Wehrstein, "Lion's Soul"
 *** !!! James Wharram, "Two Girls, Two Catamarans"
 ** !!! Kate Wilhelm, "Where Late the Sweet Birds Sing"


3.) Poly Movies

 "Another Woman's Lipstick"
 (Denise Crosby)
 Three episodes based on "Red Shoe Diaries", first episode concerns
 a woman who has two different lovers, who satisfy different needs.
 More dishonest monogamy than polyamory.

 "Belle Epogue"
 (Ariadna Gil)
 Spanish film set during the Spanish Civil War.An artist takes in
 a deserter, who repays him by sleeping with all four of his 
 daughters. It's pretty light hearted and a warm farcical romp.

 "Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice" 
 (Robert Culp, Angie Dickenson)
 This is very much a wife-swapping tale, rather than being more
 generally oriented. Widely known and raises many poly questions.

 "A Change of Seasons"
 (Shirley Maclaine, Bo Derek)
 Maclaine's professor husband has an affair with Derek; she then has
 an affair of her own, and then the four decide to go on a holiday 
 together to see whether they can work something out...

 "Enemies: A Love Story"
 (Angelica Houston, Ron Silver)
 A tale of a man and the three women in his life.

 "The Harrad Experiment"
 (James Whitmore, Tippi Hedron, Don Johnson)
 Adaptation of the Robert Rimmer book. Unfortunately it spends so 
much
 time on the topic of public nudity that it has little left over to 
 deal with poly issues.

 "Harrad Summer"

 "Heartbeat"
 (Nick Nolte)
 This is the story of "beat" reporter Jack Kerouac's affair with a 
 married couple.

 "Henry and June"
 (Uma Thurman, Fred Ward)
 Writer Henry Miller has an affair with his friend Anais Nin... and
 then his wife June shows up. Anais finds herself becoming attracted
 to June....

 "The Hunger"
 (Catherine Deneuve, David Bowie, Susan Sarandon)
 More bi than poly, and only a few moments of that. At the end
 Sarandon's character seems to have new lovers of both genders.

 "A Lesson in Love"
 (1954) (Ingmar Bergman)
 A romantic comedy about a doctor trying to win back his wife after
 she leaves him over an affair of his.
 
 "Lianna"
 (John Sayles)
 A professor's wife finds out he's haveing an affair, and at the same
 time falls in love with a female professor. More a lesbian tale than
 a poly one, but especially good at showing the effects on family and
 friends of "coming out" different.

 "Loving Couples"

 "Loving Molly"
 (Beau Bridges, Sally Fields)
 The story of three men and the one woman that they share from the 
time
 they are children and throughout their lives.

 "Lucky Lady"
 (Liza Minelli, Gene Hackman, Burt Reynolds)
 It does look like the three main characters are getting set to stay
 together at the end of the movie.

 "Mahabharata"
 Contains the marriage of five brothers, the Pandava, to a single 
wife,
 Draupadi, based (I believe) on aspects of mythology from India.

 "Mickey and Maude"

 "No Way Out"
 (Kevin Costner, Sean Young, Gene Hackman)
 Costner gets involved with Young, who is already involved with his
 boss (Hackman). Bad things happen. She actively says that she is 
 poly (before she is killed).

 "Paint Your Wagon"
 (Lee Marvin, Jane Fonda, Clint Eastwood)
 Due to the scarity of women, Marvin and Eastwood share one.

 "Red Shoe Diaries"
 Man finds out about girlfriends poly lifestyle after she kills
 herself. Then he meets her other lover.

 "Rita and Sue ... and Bob too"
 A married man's affair with two younger women causes his wife to
 leave him. Can the three lovers transmute their sexual interest 
into
 something more lasting?

 "Same Time Next Year
 (Alan Alda)
 Alda has a once a year meeting with his lover (as opposed to his 
wife),
 most of the time is spent examining the changes in the two people 
in
 the intervening times.

 "The Seduction of Joe Tynan"
 (Alan Alda)
 Alda plays a politician who falls in love with another woman at a
 convention.

 "She's Gotta Have It"
 One of Spike Lee's earliest films, deals with a polyamorous young
 woman and the three men who want her to choose. There are also
 alot of Afro-American male/female issues addressed in this movie.
 
 "Small Circle of Friends"
 Genuine poly values are central to the plot of this film about
 a MFM triad. Low-budget production, but asks good questions.
 
 "Summer Lovers"
 (Darryl Hannah)
 A young American couple on a summer vacation in the Mediterranean
 get involved with a French archaeologist.
 
 "3 of Hearts" (this has a different ending in the European release)
 (Kelly Lynch, Sherilyn Fenn, William Baldwin)
 Lesbian Lynch loses partner Fenn, who is bi, she pays Baldwin to 
 seduce Fenn and dump her, hoping that she will come back. In the 
 European release the movie ends with Baldwin getting the girl, in 
the
 American release he doesn't.

 "Threesome"
 (Laura Flynn Boyle, Steven Baldwin, Josh Charles)
 The story of 2 men and 1 woman who find themselves assigned to the
 same dorm room, and the relationship that develops. Their multi-
partner
 relationship is portrayed in a very poly-friendly way.

 "The Unbearable Lightness of Being"
 (Daniel Day-Lewis, Lena Olin)
 The womanizing Tomas falls in love with the monogamous Tereza, but
 cannot give up his lover Sabina....Meanvhile, Russian tanks roll 
over
 Prague...


4.) Poly Songs 

 Joan Armatrading, "The Weakness in Me"
 David Crosby, Jefferson Airplane, "Triad"
 Devo, "Happy Guy"
 Enya, "Marble Halls"
 Howard Jones, "Noone is to Blame"
 King Crimson, "Man With an Open Heart"
 Kathy Mar (her new tape)
 Deidre McCalla, "Don't Doubt It"
 Mondo Vita, "Four Way Stop"
 The Monks, "Love in Stereo"
 Michael Nesmith, "Different Drum"
 Prince, Cyndi Lauper, "When U Were Mine" 
 Chris Rea, "Nothing to Fear"
 Resless Heart, "Why Does It Have to Be"
 The Roches, "The Two That I Want"



5.) Other Poly Creativeness

 Love and Rockets comic books have a poly/bi accepting story line
 written by Jaime Hernandez
 Omaha the Cat Dancer and ElfQuest comic books also have main 
 characters that are frequently or occasionally involved in 
polyamourous
 relationships.


6.) Poly Organizations

 a.) Mailing lists

Triples - to subscribe send a message to triples-request@hal.com. This 
is
 a moderated list for discussion of poly issues.

Poly-Boston - to subscribe send a message to majordomo@world.std.com 
with
 the line "subscribe poly-boston" in the body of the message. This is
 a list for poly and poly-friendly folk in the Boston, MA USA area.


 b.) Organizations

 
Abundant Love Institute Abundant Love Institute
Membership Information Conference Information
P.O Box 4322 P.O. Box 6306
San Rafael, CA 94913-4322 Ocean View, HI 96737
(415) 507-1739 (808) 929-9691

Church of All Worlds Delaware Valley Synergy
P.O. Box 1542 Box 252
Ukiah, CA 95482 Huntington Valley, PA 19006-0252

Live the Dream Touchpoint
6454 Van Nuys Blvd #150 Network for the Nonmonogamous
Van Nuys, CA 91401 P.O. Box 408
818/361-6737 Chloride, AZ 86431

Loving Alternatives Oregon Local
P.O. Box 10509 P.O. Box 5247
State College, PA 16805-0509 Eugene, OR 97405
 503/683-6197

Family Tree Potomac Area Lifestyles (Pals)
c/o Earle Robinson 509 East 42nd Street 
R.R. 2, Box 759 Baltimore, MD 21218-1202
Center Barnstead, NH 03225

Tri-State Polyamory Beyond Monogamy Inc.


 

(Continued from last message)
P.O. Box 625 P.O. Box 907
New Providence, NJ 07974-0625 Morley, WA 6062? AUSTRALIA
 net: hardy@panix.com

Alternatives to Monogamy South Bay Intinet
P.O. Box 4172 P.O. Box 70203
Wheaton, IL 60189-4172 Sunnyvale, CA 94086
(708) 510-7027 (408) 730-9622

Pali Paths Glendower
P.O. Box 22586 P.O. Box 520291
Honolulu, HI 96823 Independance, MO 64052
(808) 239-6824 email: DWEST@delphi.com
email: hwhite@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu

Family Synergy Loving Alternatives
P.O. Box 2668 P.O. Box 1322
Culver City, CA 90231 Greenwood, IN 46142
 email: poly@holli.com

All of the above organizations are for people interested in poly 
relations
rather than aimed towards swinging. The following are for swingers and 
may
be more friendly towards "cruising".

P.O. Box 7128 P.O. Box 459
Buena Park, CA 90622 San Dimas, CA 91773


Most of these groups will send you information if you submit a self-
addressed stamped envelope.

The former IRC and PEP have merged to become the Abundant Love Institute
and are jointly publishing a magazine called _Loving More_. The 
magazine does include personal ads, members recieve one free, 
additional ads are $10 per. They also maintain a lending library of many 
of 
the above titles, both fiction and non-fiction available to members, as 
well as a list of local support groups.


Thanks go especially to Howard Landman and the triples mailing list, and
to Dr. Deborah Anapol and the people at ALI for allowing judicious use
of their reviews and resources.
--

 
