Call for legal recognition of polyamory

Mad as a bag of frogs

I'd be willing to bet most, group sex relationships are all male, so just another example of men kicking off because they're not getting what they think they're entitled to.

😂imagine if anyone in your family was a member of "the greens". I could never, ever take them seriously.
What an utterly cringeworthy bunch

I’m fairly sure that if Scotland had a first past the post electoral system none of these people would get anywhere near our parliament.

I really miss the days when the Green Party was interesting in our planet.

What a bunch of lunatics.

An off shoot and extension of the obsession with 'queer' politics and kink.

Isn't one of the bakers in GBBO in a polycule? I know that I am old, but how can you normalise/promote stuff like that? Wasn't Aimee Challenor in a polycule?

It’s for men with multiple wives, isn’t it?

I see Scott Herbert, heather of the Aberdeen polycule says he will speak for the motion. I might go along and see if he’ll say what the charges against him after Anne widdecombe’s murder are seeing as how he is dodging court.

polycule people don’t need legal protections, they need a cleaning schedule and a grip.

I guess they must have solutions to all the environmental issues done and dusted if they’ve got time to fanny about with stuff like this.

Isnt it a no-brainer for a party prioritising Queers ans Islam?

They also say

Where immigration rules or laws of asylum involve existing relationships with those already resident or citizens in Scotland those rules should take into account relationships that may involve multiple partners.

So there could be other angles.

However, it's not ever going to get anywhere near a statute book so it's all just navel gazing.

@nicepotoftea like getting an American (who writes paedophiles adjacent fiction) into the country because he’s married to Aimee challenor, a citizen and open about his fetishes? Are they an international branch of the Inverurie polycule? The world’s so mad I’d believe it.

On a more serious note, the Greens seem hellbent on any sexual relationship becoming accepted and legally acknowledged. How long before they try to include sex with children, if indeed they're not already?

Can you imagine the divorce settlements? It's poisonous enough with two parties, imagine three, four, ten etc?
And let me guess, the beta males of the post modern left movement who want to pull every social more down, it'll be one male (husband) and multiple women (wives), guess who'll get the bulk of the settlement, leaving more than one woman fighting for scraps.
Who's gonna get rights over the children? Sure, we have a biological mum, but all the other women have chipped in as well.
The left are always going on about the far right looking to bring in The Handmaid's Tale...I think we'll find it's the post modern left who are most likely to push us all that way.

I am outraged at this discrimination against Polynesians

The poly propaganda is always weird, with an element of smiling through gritted teeth that it’s all just great, so superior and enlightened, not at all hard work with a soupçon of oldskool sexism when you looked too closely.
The couple of ‘progressive’ poly setups I’ve been aware of personally have both involved rather vulnerable young women orbiting some grotty man who talked the talk yet walked the walk of your bog standard skeevy bloke hunting for bedpost notches. Neither ended well for some of the parties involved.

a bag of polyamorous frogs

I was thinking the same, will they shift into being a modern version of P.I.E. ?

Here’s a weird thing. I know what the Greens view is on polyamory. I know what the Greens view is on Israel. I know what the Greens view is on trans issues.

I do not know what the Greens view is on Climate Change and what steps we should take to improve it.

They may have a view. But they are too busy prioritising Big Love to publicise it.

I want to vote for a party that prioritises climate change. That should be the Greens. This should be their moment.

What are they thinking?

He was. In Aberdeen which seems to be Ground Zero for dodgy TIM polycules.

All polyamorous parnerships will have to contain at least one lawyer

A creepy guy runs a creepy movement.
That's about it, really.
Do the women in the movement, those in it for the long term, motivated by environmental concerns but also generally low level socially progressive, <really> get on with their party being the political wing of Pride?
Even if they're generally trans-supporting, are they really cool with the post modern direction Polanski is taking them in?
Polyamory is really a green and verdent hill they want to die on?
They need to get real, oust Polanski and his two mini me Deputy leader helpers, get Caroline Lucas back in as caretaker leader, and revert to sanity.

I wonder why they don't just say they want to make polygamy legal?

I read somewhere that in the US that polyamory is the fastest growing social movement, but it's not gone into online culture.
It's growth is more organic and analogue, via "on the grapevine" networking, peer to peer. Polyamours will find each other with no need of the Internet.
There is no digital online promotion as there has been with transactivism.
As a group, they realize there is huge public sentiment against it, they're not looking to visibly push society.
Sure, you have the occasional hyper visible polycules. So visible, you can smell them (hi, Sophie S). But in terms of spokesmen for the movement or even allies in the non polyamory population looking to change the law, there isn't anything.
The idea is to just let a system of living and relationships grow slowly and steadily, not drawing attention to itself.
I suspect the polyamory community in the UK of this mind would find the Greens highlighting their case and aim to change the law as highly counter productive.

I hate the way this is being plugged as a civil rights issue that is about discrimination.

It is not.

Everyone can have one legal partner as a right.

If they want more they can do the legal work themselves

The current system suits the vast majority but that does not make the minority victims.

No system will please everyone but what we have is fair and equitable.