Queerplatonic & Polyamory Society

How many of us buy the media fairytale that sufficient exposure to prerecorded airbrushed romance will adequately prepare us to make all the right assumptions in adult relationships? How many of us accept the axiom that in intimacy and intensity, more is better? How many of us have noticed cracks in the mould of one-size-fits-all across society’s diversity? How many of us have bashfully foregone clarity when told talking is ruining the mood?

Perhaps successful adult relationships are important enough to deserve earnest investment in the communicative and collaborative pillars at their core, not merely revelry in the glitz and bling on public display.

For that matter, are relationships consisting entirely of the former without the latter viable, valid, and valuable?

If such questions have plagued you for decades or resonated with you for mere seconds, your participation and perspective is welcome in our society championing the recognition of possibilites beyond the mainstream monolith of:
* ritualised romance
* premarital sex
* quasi-exclusivity
* high intensity.

Queerplatonic Relationships (QPRs) aren’t based on stock ideology, romantic intoxication and sexual attraction but instead are custom tuned to the characteristics and needs of the individuals involved. QPR is a new name for a more traditional relationship. They are as diverse as the people who make them.

Polyamory is the capacity to cherish someone and your connection with them independently of other factors and fluctuations in your life. It is less all-or-nothing, with reduced opportunity cost, risk of complacency, exploitation, and isolation. It is curious that Western fashion glamorises being someone’s only partner in a way it doesn’t glamorise being someone’s only friend or being an only child as somehow ideal. Are the causes of this exceptionalism justified and healthy?

Exploring such options may suit:
* aromantic people
* asexual people
* those for whom intensity is overwhelming and debilitating
* those who need explicit communication and expectations
* those for whom gender is not a simplistic binary
* those for whom defying cultural / religious traditions carries a steep cost.

These people still deserve a fair chance to form relationships and partnerships.