Polyamory and The Marriage Battle

I was reading an article a few days ago on Witchvox.com about a battle for the recognition of polyamorous marriage in Canada. While I personally have nothing against polyamory, I do have to say that a battle such as this would have a very difficult time being fought here in the United States, and not just because of the current "popularity" issues that are holding back the advancement of gay marriage.

The battle for gay marriage is (or should be) a relatively simple one. At its core, it is a matter of gender of one of the partners. The same legal structure behind the privileges of marriage would be kept in place with exception to that one detail. Amazing how this enormous fuss can get boiled down to that one little point, isn't it? Gay spouses have no more or less privileges than heterosexual spouses in states that allow same-sex marriage. It really is just a matter of gender.

Those who wish for the legal recognition of polyamorous relationships would have a more difficult fight on their hands because of those legal privileges and assumptions already in place relating to marriage. Things like inheritance in the absence of a will, or the ability for a spouse to make medical decisions for an unconscious spouse, or even end of life decisions in the absence of legal documents such as a living will. When there is more than one surviving spouse, the legal issues do become a lot more complex. How would pension or social security benefits for a widow/widower be handled if there is more than one per deceased spouse?

For this battle to be fought here, our entire system behind what marriage means (on a legal level) would have to change. (Let's face it, despite what opponents of gay marriage say, the issues of what any marriage constitutes should not be defined on a religious level in a country that claims to have freedom of religion.)

Sacred Sex and the Temple of Aphrodite

I just finished Laurelei Dabrielle's book In Her Service: Reflections from a Priestess of Aphrodite. I was pondering writing a review for it on a forum I'm involved with, but the nature of the book does deal with mature themes, so I figure I'll do a small review here and see how that goes.

I have to say the book was well worth buying. Laurelei explains in the beginning that her practice is not 100% Hellenic, but a blend of Neo-Pagan Traditions. This was refreshing to me, because there are a few writers in the Pagan community who like to fudge the truth when it comes to where and when their practices originate from. Having said that, there is a lot of historical evidence supporting many of her practices from a Hellenic viewpoint.

The books deals with serving a Goddess of Love, and what that entails. There is a great discussion on the sacredness of sexuality within ritual, and the function of Aphrodite's historical priests and priestesses (particularly in places such as Corinth) as "temple prostitutes". To have sex with one of these servants of Aphrodite was to be in the presence of the Goddess herself. Laurelei also mentions that in ancient times, this role of temple prostitute was usually not a choice made by the person. In the ancient world of slavery and subjugation, this practice was to be expected, but it is possible to reclaim this role and adapt it to our modern sensibilities and social evolution. Group sensual touching, the sacred marriage, and even sexual exploration of the self are mentioned as ways of reclaiming the practice of sacred sexuality.

More importantly, Laurelei stresses that the duties of a priestess of Aphrodite go beyond sex, and in fact there are many who serve Aphrodite who never engage in ritual sex. Pleasure and love come in many forms, not just sexual. A priestess could be a sympathetic ear in times of trouble, or a comforting hug.

The book contains a good bit of information about Aphrodite from a standpoint of the mythology surrounding her. It deals with her many lovers, her children, and her wrath. While the book focuses on Aphrodite's role as Goddess of Love, Laurelei also mentions her role as Sea-Goddess and the instigator of war.

The rituals outlined in the book have a fair amount of Wiccan and Druidic influence, but can be adapted to more closesly fit the historical ritual of Hellenic practice. Laurelei even begins her rituals with a purification by khernips, the lustral water used in Hellenic practice.

I would recommend this book to those interested in the worship of Aphrodite from both Hellenic and Neo-Pagan standpoints, and those who are mature enough to deal with the themes of ritual sexual expression.

I Refuse to Answer

I'm no longer going to answer a certain question that often gets posed to me. The question of how I know I'm gay if I've never had sex. Half the time this question is some attempt to convince me that I have the potential to be "cured", and sometimes it's posed to me by men who want me to have sex with them to validate my position. I'm refusing to answer this question in the future, and this blog post will be my final explanation of the subject.

Homosexuality, like heterosexuality and bisexuality, refers to sexual orientation, not sexual practice. The act of sex often has nothing to do with whether we're attracted to the other person (or persons). The horror stories of what goes on behind prison walls is not about orientation, but about control, dominance, and a breaking down of people's higher instincts to their basic animal needs. Let's face it, there are a lot of people, particularly males of our species, who have sex just to "get off".

This is why I don't believe those evangelical Christian claims that gay people can be "cured" through Christ. Gay people can have sex with people of the opposite sex without being the least bit attracted to them. That doesn't make them any less gay. What that does make them, however, are people who lie to themselves. I will note that the exception is for people who are bisexually-inclined, but even then I can't imagine that their attraction to the same sex can be turned off with a magical Bible switch.

I claim homosexuality for myself because I have never been physically attracted to women. Not once in the almost 28 years of my existence. I've also been in groups with women of all physical types and personalities, and not once have I had a physical attraction to any of them. Conversely, I have been very physically attracted to several men with certain physical types and features. Does that sound like I'm in any way uncertain of my preferences?

My choice to not have sex at this time is my own business. I'm not less gay for making that choice.