Gennemse Kategori

Forskning

seksuelt overførte sygdomme

Seksuelt overførte sygdomme hos swingere

Vi har fordomme. Det ligger til mennesket, at kategorisere ting, så vi ikke møder verden som nyfødte hvert eneste sekund. Selvom vi godt ved, at vi har fordomme, og prøver at møde folk med et åbent sind, så kommer vi ikke udenom, at fordommene stadig præger os.

En af vores fordomme er at swingere er den gruppe, der højst sandsynligt har seksuelt overførte sygdomme og at de monogame er den gruppe, der mindst sandsynligt har seksuelt overførte sygdomme. Mange undersøgelser viser, at dette ikke er korrekt, men fordommene præger os alligevel. En af effekterne af denne fordom mellem forholdstyper og seksuelt overførte sygdomme er, at vi helst ikke vil danne relationer med swingere, men gerne med de monogame. Et valg man så grueligt kan komme til at fortryde.

Tror du, at de monogame har kondomer på sig, når de er utro? Eller bliver testet hver gang de får en ny partner? Har du nogensinde læst reglerne for en swingerklub?

Kilde

Dimming the “Halo” Around Monogamy: Re-assessing Stigma Surrounding Consensually Non-monogamous Romantic Relationships as a Function of Personal Relationship Orientation
Rhonda N. Balzarini, Erin J. Shumlich, Taylor Kohut and Lorne Campbell

Abstract

Previous research suggests that both monogamous and consensually non-monogamous (CNM) participants rate monogamous targets more positively. However, this pattern of stigma toward CNM relationships and the “halo effect” surrounding monogamy is at odds with the view that people typically favor members from their own groups over members of other groups. In the current research, we sought to re-examine the halo effect, using a more direct measure of stigma (i.e., desired social distance), in a methodological context that differentiates between the three most common types of CNM relationships. A convenience sample (N = 641) of individuals who self-identified as monogamous (n = 447), open (n = 80), polyamorous (n = 62), or swinger (n = 52) provided social distance ratings in response to these same relationship orientations in a counterbalanced order. Congruent with prior findings, CNM participants favored monogamous targets over CNM targets as a broad category (replicating the halo effect). However, results indicated this effect dissipated when participants were asked to differentiate between relationships they identify with, and other CNM relationships. Furthermore, supplementary findings suggest that monogamous targets were perceived to be the least promiscuous and were associated with the lowest perceived sexually transmitted infection (STI) rates, while swinger targets were perceived as the most promiscuous and were associated with the highest perceived STI rates. Consequently, our results imply social distance is partly attributable to the perception of STI risk, but not perceptions of promiscuity.

Tak fordi du deler
mine kærester

Mine kærester og jeg

Sidste år udførte en sociologi gruppe et semester projekt om stigmatisering af polyamorøse kaldet Mine kærester og jeg.

De har begået nogle få fejl, såsom at tro at facebookgruppen Polyamori i Danmark med 1800+ medlemmer tilhører foreningen Polyamori Danmark. Det gør den ikke. Den tilhører mig, Naomi Hagelberg. Foreningen har en anden gruppe med 150 medlemmer.
Fejl nr 2 er at bogen Polyamorøs? ikke blev nævnt :O Jeg må huske at være mere oplysende om den 😉

En anden ting jeg bemærkede, er at de havde skrevet til foreningen Polyamori Danmark, men fik ikke noget svar fra dem… det lyder til at det administrative eller organisatoriske ikke er helt oppe op køre…

Men det er en god undersøgelse og interessant at se hvordan andre udenfra tolker på os. Læs den her:

Opsummerende konklusion

Vi kan sluttelig konkludere, at polyamorøse mennesker oplever stigmatisering i et mindre omfang, grundet usynligheden af deres stigma, hvilket også resulterer i, at der ikke er mange sociale kontekster, hvori de polyamorøse bliver stigmatiserede. Dog skal det nævnes, grundet den kvalitative metode, at der ikke kan drages generaliserbare konklusioner på vegne af alle polyamorøse danskere. Der ses dog gennemgående tendenser hos vores informanter, som kan tyde på at der noget mere generelt på spil i vores undersøgelse. Det vides ikke om eller hvornår polyamori bliver normaliseret i fremtiden, dog bliver det spændende at se, om vi som samfund gør plads til mere end ét par ad gangen på fortovet i fremtiden.

Tak fordi du deler
Minoriteter

Minoriteter er ikke ens

Når man er normativ, så kan man godt tro, at minoriteter af alle slags støtter hinanden. De er jo alle undertrykt, så de må da forstå hinanden? Nej. Det er desværre ikke tilfældet. Forskellige minoriteter har forskellige ideologier og nogle af disse passer ikke til hinanden. Når man er en aktivitist indenfor én minoritets problematikker, så kan man nemt føle sig som en normativ, når man bevæger sig over i en anden minoritets problematikker. Der er så mange debatter, overvejelser, tankemønstre og udfordringer, som man slet ikke kender til og derfor kommer man nemt til at træde andre over tæerne.

Man må derfor trække vejret dybt, og vise sig som uvidende og nysgerrig, når man skifter minoritetsområde, selvom man synes, at man er en hot shot i det miljø, man kommer fra. Det er som at starte næsten forfra i ens søgning af information og forståelse.

Kilde

Debating Polyamory as Research: an Auto-Ethnographic Account of a Round-Table on Polyamory and Lesbianism
Daniel Santos Cardoso, Inês Rôlo Martins

Abstract

Stemming from the auto-ethnographic telling of a round-table organized by a lesbian-focused activist group in Lisbon, Portugal, the authors reflect on the intersections between doing research, spreading that research, doing activism and working with / listening to sexual minorities as a way of critically involving the LGBT community and their concerns in the scientific process. As we’ll see, conflicting political and identity agendas might create tension between different minorities, and even the reinstatement of (homo-)normativity. We claim that only through debate, exposure and recognition (which mixes research, scientific dissemination and activism) can enable us to think in a way that includes others’ perspectives, but that the modes of performing debate also need to be critically reflected upon, keeping in sight the ethical concern for the intimate citizenship of those represented (and of those absent). 

Tak fordi du deler
polyamori og udlandet

Polyamori i udlandet

Når vi skal forstå polyamori og tale med andre mennesker om dette, så er det vigtigt at vide, at al menneskelig adfærd skal ses i den kontekst den er i. Hvad polyamorøse oplever i Danmark, er ikke det samme som hvad polyamorøse oplever i Italien.

Vi kommer heller ikke udenom, at vi påvirkes af andre lande. USA er et land med mange mennesker og som er meget visuelt i det danske polyamorøse rum. Mange danskere kan engelsk og da Danmark er småt, så søger vi inspiration fra andre lande. De engelsktalende og dermed USA, er nok det land, der fylder mest.

Denne påvirkning bør vi være bevidste om. Ønsker vi at overtage de dyder, de har i USA?

Vi i Norden en anden tilgang til polyamori end andre lande. Måske vi skulle blive mere bevidste om hvad den er, så vi kan beskytte den eller tage et aktivt valg om at være noget andet.

Kilde

Coming out Through an Intersectional Perspective: Narratives of Bisexuality and Polyamory in Italy
Beatrice Gusmano

2017

Abstract

Through an intersectional perspective, the author analyzes what it means to perform a bisexual and polyamorous identity in the Italian familistic welfare regime. Considering the intersections of polyamory and bisexuality, the author employs the Greimas semiotic square to read the process of coming out experienced by people who shared their experiences on polyamory: two interviewees define themselves as bisexual ciswomen, and one self-defines as a transsexual gay man in a primary relationship with a self-defined bisexual cisman. Afterwards, the author explores how they live their intimate lives through compulsory invisibility, coming out, and staying invisible. Finally, the author focuses on how the existence of non-normative communities opens up the possibility of meeting other bisexual people in a context where there are no bisexual communitie, and argues that this process allows people to self-identify as bisexual and polyamorous in the public sphere.

Tak fordi du deler
monogami

monogami og staten

Vores samfunds lovstruktur er bygget på et krav om monogami. Du kan ikke blive skilt med det samme, selvom I begge gerne vil. I skal lige se tiden an, selvom I måske synes, at I allerede har kæmpet nok for forholdet de sidste to år. Medmindre en af jer er utro. Så er det åbenbart slemt nok til, at I gerne må blive skilt her og nu.

I kan ikke adoptere jeres kærestes barn, medmindre en af de biologiske forældre er parat til at afsige sig ethvert ansvar overfor sit eget barn. Staten kan åbenbart ikke forholde sig til, at mere end to voksne har ansvar for et barn ad gangen. Nogen SKAL ud i kulden.

Og glem alt om at være en sammenbragt familie på folkeskolerne aula. Det er kun barnets juridiske forældre, der kan være planlæggere og have styr på barnets skolegang og tilknyttede aktiviteter. Så hvis du er den ustrukturerede forælder, så er det bare tough luck. Aftaler omkring det barns skolegang vil blive glemt igen og igen og ikke lagt ind i familiens planlægning. Du må blot håbe på, at den anden juridiske forælder er et større planlægningsmenneske end du er, så barnets skolegang i det mindste modtager støtte fra det hjem.

Det nuværende statssystem er håbløst gammeldags i forhold til vores nutid. Det må snart være på tide at staten betragter dets medborgere som individer og tilpasser strukturen derefter. Kun det, vil give plads til de utallige konstellationer, vi har i dag.

Kilde

Beyond Inclusion: Non-monogamies and the Borders of Citizenship
Pablo Perez Navarro

2016

Abstract

This paper aims to understand the extent to which monogamy operates not only as a constitutive element of marriage-like institutions but also as a meta-judicial source of frequently overlooked forms of state violence. Drawing on the case of the Spanish law, it explores the privilege-driven logic that regulates the access to a complex set of economic benefits and legal protections, including immigration related rights, in order to show the extent to which monogamy is part of the grounding structure of an exclusionary constitutional citizenship. In addition, drawing on semi-structured interviews held with Spanish poly activists and biographical interviews held with LGBTQ non-monogamous people, it offers a view of non-monogamous communities as paramount spaces of resistance when it comes to re-imagining the relationship between the state and the intimate realm, beyond the mere inclusion of poly and other non-monogamous intimate relationships in certain pieces of legislation.

Tak fordi du deler
aseksuel polyamori

Aseksuel polyamori

Når de normative skal forstå dem, der ikke lever op til samme normativitet, så overser de desværre ofte alle de mange nuancer, der er i det nonnormative. De forstår af en eller anden grund ikke, at det de undersøger, ikke kan puttes i en kasse, der er lige så stor som deres. At kasserne blot bliver mindre og mindre jo flere beskrivende detaljer, der skal medtages. Det nonnormative miljø er trods alt samlet set en meget større kasse end det normative, så vi har plads til mange forskellige kasser.

Denne manglende forståelse rammer ofte aseksuel polyamori, da de normative af en eller anden grund har svært ved at forestille sig, at et forhold ikke behøver at indeholde sex… også selvom de nok selv ofte oplever et fald i deres egen sexlyst, når de har været med den samme partner i over 7 år.

Det er derfor, det er så vigtigt, at de normative ikke udfører forskning uden at have en konsulent med, der har personlig kendskab til det nonnormative. En sådan konsulent ville i en samtale nævne “og så der er aseksuel polyamori”.

Kilde

Asexual Polyamory: Potential Challenges and Benefits
Dan Copulsky

2016

Conclusion

As is true for a wide range of diverse sexualities, polyamory is a relationship style that may be well suited for some asexual people but less so for others. Understanding the motivations that draw many asexuals to polyamory and the specific ways in which this kind of relationship can be difficult for them is a cornerstone both for providing culturally competent support and for conducting inclusive research. Three recommendations are offered below to help professionals and community members to better serve asexual and polyamorous individuals.

First, a clinician working with an asexual client should not assume what kinds of relationships the client may be a part of, or what the client’s reasons are for choosing such relationships. The clinician should also remain sensitive to aspects of relationships that may be particularly emotional for specific clients.

Researchers studying nonmonogamy can be diligent in deciding what varieties of intimate relationships to be included in their work and communicating these decisions clearly throughout the research process. If a study is limited to looking at sexual relationships, potential participants should be aware of this limitation, and research reports should be clear that the particular study does not necessarily encompass the potential richness and diversity of polyamory.

Finally, professionals advocating for asexuals through writing or speaking should strive to better reflect the full scope of experiences and insights that are represented within this community. Researchers can continue examining these rich and diverse experiences with additional study. While this paper offers insights regarding potential challenges and benefits of asexual people in polyamorous relationships, much more research is needed that focuses on the overlap between these communities. Particularly, research utilizing larger sample sizes that explores challenges and benefits, as suggested here, is warranted and useful.

Ærlighed, Tillid og Tryghed

Tak fordi du deler
forholdstyper

Forholdstyper er i et hierarki

Forholdstyper er rangeret på følgende måde:

  1. Monogame forhold
  2. Polyamorøse forhold
  3. Åbne forhold og swingere
  4. Utroskab

Hvilken plads er dine forholdstyper på?

Og ville du vælge en anden forholdstype blot for at bevæge dig op ad rangstien? Forhåbentlig har du valgt din forholdstype ud fra hvad der gør dig og dine mest glade og ikke bare for at passe ind i samfundet eller et andet menneske.

Kilde

Around Consensual Nonmonogamies: Assessing Attitudes Toward Nonexclusive Relationships
Katarzyna Grunt-Mejer, Christine Campbell

2016

Abstract

Consensual nonmonogamy is a term used to describe intimate romantic relationships that are sexually and=or emotionally nonexclusive. The present study examined the social norms that are violated by different forms of consensual nonmonogamy and the negative judgments that result. We asked 375 participants to rate hypothetical vignettes of people involved in one of five relationship types (monogamy, polyamory, open relationship, swinging, and cheating) on items related to relationship satisfaction, morality, and cognitive abilities. The monogamous couple was perceived most favorably, followed by the polyamorous couple, then the open and swinging couples who were rated equally. Participants judged the cheating couple most negatively. Although social norms of sexual and emotional monogamy are important, we conclude that the aspect that has the most effect on judgments is whether the relationship structure has been agreed to by all parties.

Tak fordi du deler
polyamorøs

Polyamorøse er mere ærlige

Når man vælger at leve et polyamorøst liv, så bliver man i de fleste tilfælde nød til at overveje alle ens livsvalg og antagelser. Man bliver meget bevidst om hvad forhold egentlig er og i den forbindelse ender man ofte med at vælge en højere grad af ærlighed. Simpelthen fordi ærlighed skaber tillid og tryghed og dermed et bedre forhold til andre mennesker. Ens bevidste overvejelser medfører selvfølgelig også, at man er parat til at besvare spørgsmål om ens forhold på et dybere niveau end “fint”, fordi man har bevidst viden om ens forhold. Fordi man har taget stilling og tænkt nogle tanker og sætninger. Det er ikke et gråt område, som man ikke har forholdt sig til og derfor tror egentlig bare er fint, uden at have noget, at basere det på.

De monogame kan lære nogle ting af de polyamorøse uden at det betyder, at de monogame skal til at være polyamorøse.

Kilde

What Do Polys Want?: A National Survey of a Hidden Population
Jim Fleckenstein, Curtis R. Bergstrand, Derrell W. Cox II

2012

Summary

Compared with the general adult population represented by the GSS, the LM sample is younger, more educated, happier, healthier, and more sexually active with more people. The findings from comparison between the GSS and the LM responses are a little curious. A number of the questions asked indicated significant differences between LM and GSS respondents, but other, similar questions resulted in very different trends, especially when asked about happiness versus satisfaction with health, friendships, romance, marriage, etc. We suspect that a couple of important factors relevant to the LM sample may be driving these curious results. One may be that the LM population is less influenced by social desirability bias than the GSS respondents. That is, while the general population may be inclined to answer “Great” or “Fine” to the question, “How are you?”, LM respondents may just as well give a thoughtful and truthful answer in line with a widely-held value of rigorous honesty within the polyamorous community. Another, but related, factor may be related to the significantly higher educational status of LM respondents and their highly rational assessment of all questions posed to them. In the words of one long-term polyamory activist and advocate, Jim Fleckenstein, poly folk have a life- and relationship-orientation that is “deliberative, ruminative, and picky.” They have deep friendships and connections, but they also have high expectations for these interpersonal relationships.

Ærlighed, Tillid og Tryghed

Tak fordi du deler
1 ud af 5

1 ud af 5 har prøvet nonmonogami

1 ud af 5. Hver femte person. Når der er så mange, der har prøvet forhold, der ikke kun består af to personer, svarer det så overens med hvor meget der bliver undervist seriøst og uddybende i polyamori og andre versioner af nonmonogami på alle områder, der omhandler personer, forhold, identitet og seksualitet?

Jeg tror det ikke…

Hvordan ændrer vi det? Hvordan får vi undervisningen til at afspejle virkelighedens verden?

Kilde

Prevalence of Experiences With Consensual Nonmonogamous Relationships: Findings From Two National Samples of Single Americans
M. L. Haupert, Amanda N. Gesselman, Amy C. Moors, Helen E. Fisher, Justin R. Garcia

2016

Abstract

Although academic and popular interest in consensual nonmonogamy (CNM) is increasing, little is known about the prevalence of CNM. Using two separate U.S. Census based quota samples of single adults in the United States (Study 1: n = 3,905; Study 2: n = 4,813), the present studies show that more than one in five (21.9% in Study 1; 21.2% in Study 2) participants report engaging in CNM at some point in their lifetime. This proportion remained constant across age, education level, income, religion, region, political affiliation, and race, but varied with gender and sexual orientation. Specifically, men (compared to women) and people who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (compared to those who identify as heterosexual) were more likely to report previous engagement in CNM. These findings suggest that a sizable and diverse proportion of U.S. adults have experienced CNM, highlighting the need to incorporate CNM into theoretical and empirical therapy and family science work.

Tak fordi du deler
Forskning i Polyamori

Forskning i polyamori er påvirket af stigma

Når man prøver at oplyse verden om hvordan ting hænger sammen, så bliver man så træt af at nogle mennesker, og der er desværre en hel del af dem, konstant og hele tiden møder én med mistillid. De vil simpelthen ikke tro på hvad man siger.

Selv hvis man er forsker, der præsenterer forskning i polyamori, så vil dem der præsenterede fund, der favoriserer polyamori, bliver opfattet som mere partiske end forskere, der præsenterer fund, der favoriserer monogami.

Hvordan kommer vi videre, i den gode sags tjeneste, når vi skal trækkes bagud af folk, der holder sig for øjnene? Hvordan får vi mere forskning i polyamori?

Kilde

Investigation of Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships: Theories, Methods, and New Directions
Terri D. Conley, Jes L. Matsick, Amy C. Moors, and
Ali Ziegler.
Department of Psychology, University of Michigan; Departments of Psychology and Women’s, Gender, & Sexuality Studies, The Pennsylvania State University; College of Engineering, Purdue University; and Department of Social Sciences, University of Alaska Southeast Ketchikan

First Published March 27, 2017

Abstract

We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships
could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships
differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by
the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.

Tak fordi du deler
  • 1
  • 2