I am Bisexual, Polyamorous and an Anarchist. This should be a mere statement matter of
fact, not taken as a radical declaration.
Better yet, it shouldn't really need to be said at all. It should be enough to just be me. I should
be living in a society that is not dominated either by an intrusive government
or a benighted Rabbinut and go about the business of
living and loving as I will, guided only by the desire to increase good. But In
Being Bisexual, Polyamourous and an Anarchist is being thrice wholly
misunderstood in
Bisexuals aren't
readily accepted by anyone. We are not "queer". We should not be lumped together with the GLT,
BDSMs and the heterosexuals – all those whose
sexuality is partially expressed, unhealthily expressed and/or bespeaks an
underdeveloped ability to love oneself and others.
We, the bisexual polyamorous (also called bipoly)
embody the most healthy and whole Human sexuality. We
are the sexuality of the future. Ours is
the sexual expression that will become the norm as society becomes better fit
to Human needs.
Polyamory is likewise misunderstood. It is thought of as some sort of hedonistic
swinging or cheating and a total disregard for the sensibilities and
sensitivities of one's sexual partners.
Polyamory, it must be stressed and
repeated, is not about cheating and not about swinging. Polyamory is
being able to love, truly love, more than one mate
profoundly and intimately in a sustained way.
Polyamory is defined as consensual, responsible
non-monogamy.
Finally, I am an
anarchist. The nouns 'anarchy', 'anarchism' and 'anarchist', being misunderstood
as well, conjure up mental images of a society that has come undone
and has fallen into utter chaos, wherein violence is rampant and there are no
societal means of bringing the nightmare under control.
Let us look at the
definitions of those terms for clarification:
Anarchy: 1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or
political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian
society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of
order : DISORDER
Anarchism: 1 : a political theory holding all forms of governmental
authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on
voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups
2 : the advocacy or practice of anarchistic
principles
Anarchist: 1 : one who rebels against any authority, established order,
or ruling power
2 : one who believes in, advocates, or promotes anarchism
or anarchy;
especially : one who uses violent means to overthrow the established
order (Merriam-Webster
Online Dictionary)
Anarchy is simply
the absence of government. Anarchists feel most comfortable with definitions 1a
and 1c of 'anarchy'. Whereas, most people who are not anarchists would define
the absence of the order that governments impose as disorder, but this is not
the case. Disorder is the opposite of
order, not the absence thereof. Therefore,
definition 2a of 'anarchy' is clearly incorrect.
Further, it must
be asked: Is that which governments
impose on their citizenries order? Is it
the highest degree of order possible in society? We see a great deal of
lawlessness and disorder in society precisely because a government is in place.
Therefore, definition 1b of 'anarchy' may be set aside as erroneous as well.
Anarchists would
agree with definition 1 of entry 'anarchism'.
As to definition 2, we must look at entry 'anarchist', which is how we
define ourselves, in order to see if the dictionary's definition jibes with our
self-definition.
While it is true
that there are some "hot heads" that would fit the Merriam-Webster
definition of "anarchist", they are not considered true anarchists by
anarchists.
The definition of
an anarchist, a genuine anarchist, is one whose sentiments are best summed up
in the following excerpt, the author of which is unknown to me:
THE BENEFITS OF NON-CLASS STRUGGLE
ANARCHISM TO THE MOVEMENT AS A WHOLE
Revolution is a process ever going. Like a river it flows;
changing shape, altering its course, sometimes slowing down, sometimes
becoming a rapid. At times we lose sight of it behind the dogma of some
ideology or another. But it can never be stopped. Since the first slave said
'no', since the first people rose up against the tyrants, since the concept of
Freedom was formed, the Revolution has always been there. As a comrade wrote to
me, "Revolution is a process, not an historical event". The nature of
the Revolution stems from the forces it encounters, the aspirations of those
within it, and the strength of the reaction. If it can progress unrestrained,
then it is likely to be peaceful. The ends will never justify the means, they
are inextricably bound together and what better way is there of taking
someone's freedom than by killing them. Violence is the basis upon which
government stands, and as such it is the counter Revolution. From the writings
of Kropotkin up to Colin Ward there have been
attempts to hi-light points in existing society where the river may flow -
worker co-ops, food co-ops, alternative welfare and education, and countless
examples of how order is spontaneous, and springs up from the very act, and
point of association itself: "What kept us together was our work, our
mutual interdependencies in this work, our factual interests in one gigantic
problem with its many specialist ramifications. I had not solicited co-workers.
They had come of themselves. They remained, or they left when the work no
longer held them. We had not formed a political group, or worked out a programme of action...Each one had made his contribution
according to his interests in the work...There are, then objective biological
work functions capable of regulating human co-operation. Exemplary work organises its forms of functioning organically and
spontaneously, even though only gradually, gropingly and often making mistakes.
In contra-distinction, the political organisations,
with their 'campaigns' and 'platforms' proceed without any connection with the
tasks and problems of daily life".
Like the fishermen in Brixham, or the miners in Durham or Brora,
Scotland, workers co-operatives provide small, rare examples of how a task
provides its own point of association, and provides the associates with a
focus, that transcends any necessity for coercive pressure. In short, the act
of society provides its own order internally, whereas all ' governments attempt
to impose it externally, stifling and smothering the social instinct. These
examples exist in modern society. They are not memories of an age before the
nation-state, but are modern facts. Paul Goodman once described anarchism as
both conservative and radical, for we must attempt to conserve those places
where liberty may be developed in full, as well as create new ones. Gustav Landaur also wrote along the same lines "The state is
not something which can be destroyed by a revolution, it is a condition of
human behaviour; we destroy it by contracting other
relationships, by behaving differently". Even, according to the film
'Michael Collins', the Irish Republican leader Eamon
de Valera spoke along the same lines by claiming roughly
that "We defeat the British Government by ignoring it".
Obviously, what is said about the British government in the
passage above is applicable to all governments that stand vis-à-vis a
governed.
We see, then, that the dictionary definition of 'anarchist' is
patent nonsense and may be discarded in toto.
My vision is the
founding of a BiPoly Community, which is an
anarchistic cooperative, of some kind in
It is my
conviction that healthy Polyamory cannot exist in a
society dominated by capitalism, and the concomitant being number one,
insensitivity to one's fellows, competitiveness and so on.
We are witness to far
too many people in capitalist societies, societies in which emotional
starvation has been painstakingly cultivated as a means to spur materialism in
vain hopes of filling the abyss within, who call themselves polyamorists,
but who are, in actuality, self-gratifying generates. Polyamory,
in general, simply does not work for those firmly ensconced in the "me
generation" mentality.
My vision is to
urge Israel in the direction of evolving into an anarchistic society, i.e., a
society marked by the absence of oppressive government; a vibrant, robust,
natural, normal form of Human interaction in which true Bisexual Polyamory can exist as a norm.
I believe that as
we evolve into more loving and more Human beings, we will change how our
intimate relationships are expressed, our familial structures will take
different forms and, of course, we will develop societies that allow for
greater freedoms and quality.
Somebody in
I realized it
devolved upon me and I have begun writing on these subjects in my own name here
in
It's scary to
"come out" in
Someone has to
loosen the fetters of society telling us how much we can love and how, even as
how much money we can have and how we are permitted to disburse it is dictated
to us.
Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan,