Polyamorous Families – Parenting Practice, Stigma and Social Regulation

As a response to the greater visibility of alternative relationship and family forms, polyamory (i.e. the practice of consensual multi-partner relationships) has recently moved to the centre of public media attention. Questions of polyamory have emerged as a major concern within law, social policy, family sociology, gender and sexuality studies. Yet certain core issues have remained underexplored. This includes the distinctive nature of polyamorous intimacy, the structure of poly household formations and the dynamics of care work within poly families. In particular, poly parenting has been subject to tabooisation and scandalisation. Governing bodies, the judiciary and educational institutions have remained largely ignorant of polyamorous relationships. Research documents the exclusions of poly families (and individuals) from access to legal provisions and protections and their common discrimination in the courts, namely in custody cases. It further highlights the discrimination of polyidentified adolescents in school and college settings and the predicament that poly families face when interacting with public institutions (including schools and kindergardens). Insights into parenting practices and the organisation of childcare is vital for understanding the transformative potential of polyamorous ways of relating. It is also important for challenging the common demonisation and stigmatisation of polyamory within conservative family politics that perceives polyamory exclusively from a harm perspective. This paper will review and critically analyse existing research on poly parenting focussing on three dimensions: (a) parenting practices, (b) social and legal discrimination, and (c) parental response to stigmatisation. The paper argues for a stronger incorporation of queer perspectives within the guiding frameworks of research into parenting in consensually non-monogamous and polyamorous relationships to highlight the transformative potential of the ‘queer bonds’ that sustain many of these practices

Polyamory: Intimate practice, identity or sexual orientation?

Polyamory means different things to different people. While some consider polyamory to be nothing more than a convenient label for their current relationship constellations or a handy tool for communicating their willingness to enter more than one relationship at a time, others claim it as one of their core identities. Essentialist identity narratives have sustained recent arguments that polyamory is best understood as a sexual orientation and is as such comparable with homosexuality, heterosexuality or bisexuality. Such a move would render polyamory intelligible within dominant political and legal frameworks of sexual diversity. The article surveys academic and activist discussions on sexual orientation and traces contradictory voices in current debates on polyamory. The author draws on poststructuralist ideas to show the shortcomings of sexual orientation discourses and highlights the losses which are likely to follow from pragmatic definitions of polyamory as sexual orientation

Poly Economics-Capitalism, Class, and Polyamory

Academic research and popular writing on nonmonogamy and polyamory has so far paid insufficient attention to class divisions and questions of political economy. This is striking since research indicates the significance of class and race privilege within many polyamorous communities. This structure of privilege is mirrored in the exclusivist construction of these communities. The article aims to fill the gap created by the silence on class by suggesting a research agenda which is attentive to class and socioeconomic inequality. The paper addresses relevant research questions in the areas of intimacy and care, household formation, and spaces and institutions and advances an intersectional perspective which incorporates class as nondispensable core category. The author suggests that critical research in the field can stimulate critical self-reflexive practice on the level of community relations and activism. He further points to the critical relevance of Marxist and Postmarxist theories as important resources for the study of polyamory and calls for the study of the contradictions within poly culture from a materialist point of view. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

The Battle for a Sustainable Food Supply

Since the time that Homo sapiens took up farming, a battle has been waged against pests and diseases which can cause significant losses in crop yield and threaten a sustainable food supply. Initially, early control techniques included religious practices or folk magic, hand removal of weeds and insects, and “chemical” techniques such as smokes, easily available minerals, oils and plant extracts known to have pesticidal activity. But it was not until the early twentieth century that real progress was made when a large number of compounds became available for testing as pesticides due to the upsurge in organic chemistry. The period after the 1940s saw the introduction of important families of chemicals, such as the phenoxy acid herbicides, the organochlorine insecticides and the dithiocarbamate fungicides. The introduction of new pesticides led to significant yield increases, but concern arose over their possible negative effects on human health and the environment. In time, resistance started to occur, making these pesticides less effective. This led agrochemical companies putting in place research looking for new modes of action and giving less toxic and more environmentally friendly products. These research programmes gave rise to new pesticide families, such as the sulfonylurea herbicides, the strobilurin fungicides and the neonicotinoid insecticide classes