Re: [UUPoly-L] Public Archives Redux

["Tara Shakti-Ma" <dakinitara@tantrikapath.com>]

Hi Jasmine:

I'm finding myself agreeing with much of what you're saying here, and remembering that after all this list is named UUs for Poly Awareness (?? or something close to that).  However, from the start of my joining there have been a number of very personally oriented posts, so I figured the "awareness" was...well, just the name that came up, but with no particular specific intent to actually only be for awareness "work".

What I hear you supporting is the concept of this list as a place for advocacy and awareness work above all else.  Perhaps that emphasis has been lost on me, in my default understanding that this list was meant more as a support for UUs (and UU-friendlies) who simply happen  have the orientation of being poly in common.  

As a member of Friends, I see a number of parallels to your concerns as they relate to wanting to actually support a "movement" that promotes inclusion of poly-folk into the common rituals and official statements of support issued by UU congregations, as well as the wider UU body.

Among Friends (aka Quakers...not our preferred name btw), much progress has occurred in not only the acceptance, but also the embracing ("taking under the care of the Meeting") of same sex unions.   A bit over a year ago my Monthly (local) Meeting revised it's "Minute of Support of Same Sex Unions".  I think they decided to morph it from being a separate statement of support of same sex unions, to a more inclusive one which acknowledges and embraces *any* committed sexual-loving union (regardless of the gender of the parties involved).  Very nice actually.  However, while I noticed the new wording was more expansive and inclusive, it continued to make reference to a commitment "between 2 adults".  At the time I didn't have the time or energy to engage in the consensus process in a manner I knew would be bringing an abruptly new twist to the statement.  When the time is right, and the pieces seem to be in place, we can request it be revisited and potentially recrafted to include *any* committed relationship regardless of gender *or* number of people involved.  A discussion group was created for "Poly Quakers", and over the past year or so we've just started to make ourselves more visible to the wider Friends community.  I feel UUs are ahead of us in organizing in this regard.  

So from that point of relative common ground, my response to the rest of what you said is interspersed below....
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: JasmineGld@aol.com 
  To: uupoly-l@uupa.org 
  Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2009 8:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [UUPoly-L] Public Archives Redux


  In a message dated 8/29/2009 10:02:16 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
  dakinitara@tantrikapath.com writes:

  >> *ON THE OTHER HAND* - I do not have a sense of 
  >> this discussion list being so much a source for 
  >> poly-awareness promotion and social change activism.  
   
  >And yet, this is precisely what poly UUs need, if we are to increase the  
  acceptance of polyamorous individuals and families in UU congregations and  
  provide educational resources to religious professionals and lay leaders. One 
   website and nine trustees cannot accomplish all that work by ourselves. 
  It's  simply not possible. In order to accomplish the work that was originally 
   envisioned by the creators of UUPoly, we require a large network of poly 
  UUs and  UU allies throughout the Association speaking up visibly within our  
  congregations and districts, leading religious education programs about  
  polyamory, and consistently doing the work of the congregation while living  
  quietly, yet visibly, poly lives. These are the things that create change.  
  Networks such as these require their own support system -- support for the 
  work  we doing. 
   
  >* How did you first approach your minister/ director of religious  
  education? 
   
  >* How did you ask for non-discrimination policy to include  polys?

  >* How did you deal with a nervous teacher? 
  >* How did you (fill in the blank)? 

  I totally grok all this.  This all seems appropriate for a list that clearly states it's intent as a discussion group is strictly for the purpose of education and advocacy work.   I wonder if I missed that in the fine print.  At any rate, what I understand you to be saying is that while there is a resource for advocacy and education efforts (a web site?), you feel that it in and of itself does not sufficiently convey the depth and breadth of the issue as an archive of "real life" issues discussions can.   This poses a dilemma for those who have some real life personal issues they want to post, and do not want them to be fodder for advocacy or awareness work....they simply want support in what at present feels to them to be a private issue.    What I hear from many poly-folk is that they don't care to be a poly-posterchild or  have being an activist foisted upon them via "outing by default"...they're simply trying to get their own house in order at the moment.  I see 2 distinct (though clearly not unrelated) interests/concerns here.

  So...how to possibly meet both needs?

   

  > >We may talk about those aspects as issues on 
  >> our minds, but I don't see it as a reliable or desirable 
  > >resource for promoting poly-awareness.  
   
  >On the contrary, it is the single most effective tool we have. One person  
  telling another person, "This is how it worked (or didn't work) for me, and 
  this  is what I would have done differently." One person telling another 
  person, "Yes,  I really said all that out loud in my congregation, and then 
  they elected me to  the Board." 

  Oh yes!....I can understand this for advocacy work....but what about for more personal life situations?  The example you site is certainly not one requiring concerns for privacy.  But what about those folks who are simply trying to figure things out...where privacy may be a very real issue?  As some poly-folk have said, they simply do not want to be conscripted by default into being an activist just because they're poly.
   

  >> I see this list-serve primarily as a *support group* for those 
  >> in (and or curious about) the inner workings of 
  >> poly-relationships.  
   
  >Why? The Internet has hundreds of support groups for general discussion  
  about polyamory, most of which are suitable for disclosing sensitive personal  
  details. Why do we need yet one more just exactly like all those hundreds 
  of  others? 

  Hey  :-)  ....I'm not saying that *I need* this list to be anything...except perhaps clear in what it's intent is...which I feel is what's causing the debate/confusion over whether this list should be private vs. public.  Is it purely for activism and education?.....support?....both?   If both, how can the needs of both interests be met sufficiently?  A little crumb for consideration I want to throw in is this - While we can all find poly-fellowship and support on a variety of other lists (I agree), I'm imagining that just like Poly-Friends, there are Poly-UUs who really want to find support from within their intentional spiritual family, and at present that support is about very personal issues, and not issues around their congregation and being an activist.  

   

  >If UUPoly devolves from its intended purpose of networking for the purposes I described above into just one more poly support group, we will lose a powerful  tool in our work toward making awareness and educational resources widely available to all UUs. 

  And herein lies the rub and the possibly need for further clarification.  If this list's intended purpose was originally and forever for serving education and advocacy work, then certainly conversation should remain in that vein and likely remain open and transparent.  What awareness and educational tools are available via accessing the archives of the discussions that occur here?  Is there a clear, user-friendly way that one would find them?  Wouldn't those needs be better served on a web page that provided links to the relevant documents?   If on the other hand this list has felt inclined to expand it's purpose to be also a support group - about serving the personal, real life, intimate dilemmas and questions people have about living polyamorously, then I imagine that privacy would serve that intent better.  So my question remains, how can this list serve both purposes and satisfy both?   Or can't it?  Maybe was never intended to???

   
  >Keeping the archives public serves several purposes. One of the purposes is transparency -- As we network, anyone can watch what we're doing and see for  themselves what we are "really up to"... and maybe they don't WANT to  subscribe to the list. It also serves to keep us on our toes. If people might be  watching, we will behave ourselves better--at least I hope we will. It will make  us think twice, make us improve ourselves. And lastly, it will remind us to think twice about posting too many details about personal issues on a list  whose primary purpose is networking to create change. Keep us on topic at least a little bit.

  And I can totally grok all this.  I think you've hit a key point here.  I say this as an "outsider"...as a spiritually-inclined, but not UU, poly-folk.   When I found this list I understood it to be a list for folks with a somewhat similar eclectic spiritual orientation, in addition to being poly.  I've seen organizational and activism oriented posts and discussions come through, but my over-all sense was that this is ultimately a support resource.   If indeed this list's primary purpose is activism, then that changes the whole landscape of my thoughts and opinion about public vs. private archives.

  So I suppose my ultimate question out of all this then is....What is the current official purpose of this list?   Maybe a number of us have not "grokked in fullness" that this indeed is not a support resource for personal issues, but rather a networking resource of poly-activists in creating more acceptance within UU structures.  If this is indeed the official purpose of this list, then I don't see the value of keeping the archives private.   Perhaps the 2 purposes might be better served if this list more boldly reclaimed it's original purpose (as you state it to be), and a second list be started, perhaps with a name such as "UUPolys- personal discussions". 

  I'm not being a wise-ass here....I'm totally resonating with your concerns...while also suggesting that the original purpose and clarity may have gotten lost over time by the thrust of a co-existing need for a space for UUs (and UU-friendlies) to share and seek support in like-spirited company on very personal and somewhat private "non-activist" matters. 

  This ends my brain spill for the moment  :-)    Tara