Personal reflections on polyamory, polygyny, and relationship workshops in South Africa

don't understand the difference between these two," I said, prompting the educators to confer amongst themselves in siZulu. Finally, one offered, "Be Faithful is about monogamy with one partner. Zero Grazing is about having multiple wives and not going outside the marriage." The others seemed to agree. Given their limited English and my limited siZulu, I decided not to ask: "Does promoting both strike you as a mixed message?" (I did ask whether they think people listen to their advice. In response, they just looked depressed.) Clearly, the fidelity fix has arrived. What's harder to determine is how much, and in what manner, the message is being emphasized -- not to mention, whether it's actually taking root. KK Ok Given my experience with polyamory, and my nigh-rabid promotion of straightforward communication as the Cure For All Ills, I can't help wondering: would it help to port communication tactics from our polyamorous allies over to southern Africa? But polyamory is fundamentally different from polygyny. Polyamory assumes that both partners have equal footing -- equal negotiating status -- whereas polygyny assumes that men are entitled to privileges women aren't. Would it be possible to take the lessons of even-handed polyamory, and apply them to polygyny? What if I choose not to address polygyny -- to avoid the whole culturally fraught debate, and just create relationship communication workshops inspired by polyamorous (and BDSM) analysis? (That way, with no one alienated by an overt stance, I may reach the audience better anyway.) Will it work if I teach from a perspective of assumed gender equality? My instinct is "yes"; I've even found a heartening example! The well-known South African Pastor Agrippa Khathide preaches equality for women and sexual pleasure for everyone (as long as they're married first, of course). He gives explicit sermons including technical sexual advice, and has been quoted in interviews asserting things like: "married people should be totally free to express themselves any way they wish in the bedroom," that "they must be willing to experiment, explore and explicitly acknowledge the giving and receiving of pleasure," and that women are entitled to "enjoyment of sex like men.” If he can do that, surely I can do something similar! Surely, then, my inherent egalitarian assumptions would make a positive impact, even if I say nothing direct about irritating male entitlement. Yet I worry that if I focus on relationship communication and don't directly take on the monogamy juggernaut, I will sidestep the heart of these debates. Indeed, not only might I be sidestepping -- I might be turning my gaze from the very place I ought to focus. te ok ok Perhaps the hardest part about wrapping my head around a fidelity campaign isn't whether certain tactics are appropriate or inappropriate, effective or ineffective. It's that they can be both, or neither -- and while culture matters, it varies by individual. More to the point, while culture affects attitudes towards Abstinence and Condoms, there aren't many ways to interpret the implementation of those two dicta. HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018588