The more than a week I went without posting was due, in part, to this post sitting, mostly finished, for days. I’ve been really busy, it’s true, but I also fear that I’m going to ruffle some feathers. Well, let the ruffling commence.
Episode 11 of the podcast and its discussion of the early, redacted episodes as well as Person A and Person B really got me thinking. I’ve been on the wrong end of Bernie, Belle and Will’s sharp tongues—or Danny has, at least. One of the episodes was in large part an extended rant about swingers, which seem to be people who don’t do poly the way Belle does. Now, despite our recent problems with her insane jealousy, I like Belle. She introduced me to the Kanawi community. But she is very…let us say rigorous…in her views on some subjects.
Danny and I have been dating for almost two years now, and are thinking about living together soon. He’s an incredibly important part of my life. He is also not a swinger, at least as I define it. Both Danny and I are open to short relationships. We do not practice polyfidelity the way Belle and her partners do. I might be open to polyfidelity should I find the right group of people. Being open to new experiences is very important to me, however, so I’m not sure I would feel truly comfortable never being able to form a partnership with a new person again. But I digress.
Danny is not a swinger. And so I got very angry when the episode characterized him as such. I was part of the group (with Person A and Person B, and a few others) that lobbied for the episode to be taken down. Now that I have some distance and have been able to talk more calmly with the Polytics crew about it, I understand better what was going on. Obviously, I’m blogging here on the Polytics site, so I don’t bear a grudge the way Person A and Person B do.
I do think it would be useful to have a discussion about what the purpose of the podcast really is. Who is the audience? Is it for the Kanawi community? Is it for a larger public? Is it for discussing issues or telling people’s secrets? Is inciting drama within its mission? Because let me tell you, when Person A and Person B find out that their drumstick story has been shared with the world, the drama is going to be crazy. (How they haven’t yet is beyond me.) Bernie and Will and Jakob all knew that, and yet they told the story and didn’t edit it out. Is that really responsible and good for the community?
I suppose the same question might be asked about airing Belle’s Jello drama. But that seems different to me because it was Belle talking about herself, and she didn’t share any secrets or embarrass anyone other than herself. Tina and I know that everything was completely innocent between us.
“Every person, all the events of your life are there because you have drawn them there. What you choose to do with them is up to you.” –Richard Bach