Colombia recognizes first polyamorous family

[Morphine Prince 110,023]

Three gay men say they have gained legal recognition as the first "polyamorous family" in Colombia, where same-sex marriages were legalised last year.

"We wanted to validate our household... and our rights, because we had no solid legal basis establishing us as a family," said one of the men, actor Victor Hugo Prada, in a video published by Colombian media on Monday.

He said he and his two partners, sports instructor John Alejandro Rodriguez and journalist Manuel Jose Bermudez, signed legal papers with a solicitor in the city of Medellin, establishing them as a family unit with inheritance rights.

"This establishes us as a family, a polyamorous family. It is the first time in Colombia that has been done."

Lawyer and gay rights activist German Rincon Perfetti said there are many three-person unions in Colombia but this was the first one to be legally recognised.

"It is a recognition that other types of family exist," he told AFP.

Source: https://www.google.com/amp/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/colombia-gets-first-polyamorous-family-three-men-legally-established/amp/

[Fernster7 7,976]

Don't know how to feel about it tbh

Good for them I guess, but I'd never be able to have this kind of relationship and I kinda feel this will backfire on the LGBT community because all of those stereotypes. 

[rumours 45,521]

Cool for them. If they are happy, then that's what matters. 

[MJHolland 12,725]

idk what this is doing in the LGBT tag to be fair 

yes they're 3 men but that's beside the point of this story, ya feel?

 

[Gaga Lazuli 8,658]

 Great, I can wait for more steriotyping of this community. 

[darkchylde 14,857]

while i believe poly doesn't necessarily mean lgbt (cishet people are not lgbt even if they choose to date multiple people at the same time), i think this is good news.

open / multiple relationships help dismantling the idea of romantic love built by the heteronorm & capitalism and i think they're a healthier enviroment to raise children (if they choose to) on.

 

20 minutes ago, Fernster7 said:

Don't know how to feel about it tbh

Good for them I guess, but I'd never be able to have this kind of relationship and I kinda feel this will backfire on the LGBT community because all of those stereotypes. 

we're not responsible for the sterotypes put over us. if you're referring to "queer people being promiscuous" there's nothing wrong with living and enjoy your own sexuality as long as you are healthy.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

Slay @ polyamory recognition  

It's gotta start somehow, and in a non toxic "one man, 5 wives" kind of way  

[Fernster7 7,976]

1 minute ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Slay @ polyamory recognition  

It's gotta start somehow, and in a non toxic "one man, 5 wives" kind of way  

Why is that toxic and this isn't?

[Fernster7 7,976]

13 minutes ago, Reprise said:

while i believe poly doesn't necessarily mean lgbt (cishet people are not lgbt even if they choose to date multiple people at the same time), i think this is good news.

open / multiple relationships help dismantling the idea of romantic love built by the heteronorm & capitalism and i think they're a healthier enviroment to raise children (if they choose to) on.

 

we're not responsible for the sterotypes put over us. if you're referring to "queer people being promiscuous" there's nothing wrong with living and enjoy your own sexuality as long as you are healthy.

Well, yes, that's why I wrote good for them. But if you live in a country where gay people are barely starting to be socially accepted is kinda hard for you to not worry about news like this because you've been figthing these stereotypes all your life and now ignorant people have a reason to keep saying those things about you. It's not our problem, I agree and it sucks that it's this way but it's the truth.

Also, I don't agree at all with the bolded part.

[Shipper 13,114]

His name is Victor Hugo Prada?

I bet their kids' name will be Louis Gucci Vuitton Prada-Rodriguez-Bermudez and Tommy Fendi Hilfiger Prada-Rodriguez-Bermudez.

[darkchylde 14,857]

1 hour ago, Fernster7 said:

Also, I don't agree at all with the bolded part.

well the truth is it's better for children to be raised by communites and more than two parenting figures create better enviroments for them.

as for the romantic idea of love, polyamor is based on the idea of living love freely without jealousy.

1 hour ago, Fernster7 said:

Why is that toxic and this isn't?

when polyamor is constructed on relationships between 1 man and more women, it's usually an unequal relationship where the man holds more power than the women involved. people usually mistake the relationship between 1 man and multiple woman with polyamor, when the truth is that in polyamory relationships all parts are equal and the relationship is multidirectional.

 

i'm sure it's a hard concept to get a grisp on, specially about rejecting romantic love, since we've all been raised to believe the ideal family is one constructed by a man, a woman and their children, a concept of family created by both religion and capitalism.

as i said, it's a tight concept and i'm pretty bad at explaining it in a language that's not my own but i hope you understood better what i meant

[Fernster7 7,976]

2 hours ago, Reprise said:

well the truth is it's better for children to be raised by communites and more than two parenting figures create better enviroments for them.

as for the romantic idea of love, polyamor is based on the idea of living love freely without jealousy.

when polyamor is constructed on relationships between 1 man and more women, it's usually an unequal relationship where the man holds more power than the women involved. people usually mistake the relationship between 1 man and multiple woman with polyamor, when the truth is that in polyamory relationships all parts are equal and the relationship is multidirectional.

 

i'm sure it's a hard concept to get a grisp on, specially about rejecting romantic love, since we've all been raised to believe the ideal family is one constructed by a man, a woman and their children, a concept of family created by both religion and capitalism.

as i said, it's a tight concept and i'm pretty bad at explaining it in a language that's not my own but i hope you understood better what i meant

Don't worry about that, I understand perfectly and English is not my first language either. 

Well, I don't know but in my case at least I'd like to know who my parents are, whatever their sexual orientation is. And I can't imagine having multiple paternal figures all sharing a love relationship, like I understand when people have more than two parents because they married again or whatever but there are limits in their relationship. 

Well the truth is we don't know if those relationships are equal or not, even when it's just one man and multiple women, so they are both ok or both wrong. 

And I love the idea of romantic love and I think is as valid as this kind of relationships, I never stated I had something against them so I'd be glad if you could respect monogamous relationships too and don't call them a product. 

[darkchylde 14,857]

9 hours ago, Fernster7 said:

And I love the idea of romantic love and I think is as valid as this kind of relationships, I never stated I had something against them so I'd be glad if you could respect monogamous relationships too and don't call them a product.

I knew I didn't explain myself correctly... I'm not calling monogamous relationships a product, it's more complex than that. We are the conscuence of years of christian/religious and capitalist ideology and what i mean by romantic love is probably not what you understand.

Romantic love is an idea derivated from Romanticism (hence its name) and all romance comes from there. There's a diference between what's ideologycally romantic and what we understand as romance (dates, gestures, etc.).

The Romantic idea of love is about how love is "meant" and "expected" to be about sacrifice and jealous when it really has nothing to do with it. The Romantic idea of love is what creates most toxic relationships between men and women (and queer couples who take roles from heteronormative pairings). i.e: when a man beats a woman because it's "his woman", being possesive and restrictive of your partners, etc. are all traits of romantic love. This idea is mostly supported by the patriarchy and the heternorm because it helps strength the idea that a woman belongs to a men.

[Fernster7 7,976]

2 hours ago, Reprise said:

I knew I didn't explain myself correctly... I'm not calling monogamous relationships a product, it's more complex than that. We are the conscuence of years of christian/religious and capitalist ideology and what i mean by romantic love is probably not what you understand.

Romantic love is an idea derivated from Romanticism (hence its name) and all romance comes from there. There's a diference between what's ideologycally romantic and what we understand as romance (dates, gestures, etc.).

The Romantic idea of love is about how love is "meant" and "expected" to be about sacrifice and jealous when it really has nothing to do with it. The Romantic idea of love is what creates most toxic relationships between men and women (and queer couples who take roles from heteronormative pairings). i.e: when a man beats a woman because it's "his woman", being possesive and restrictive of your partners, etc. are all traits of romantic love. This idea is mostly supported by the patriarchy and the heternorm because it helps strength the idea that a woman belongs to a men.

Oh I understand now, well I agree with you about that but that's not what comes to my mind when we talk about romantic love, in fact that's sick, beating your partner or thinking they belong to you is not right. To me romantic love is about respect, and two people who choose to be faithful to each other, if one of the parts doesn't want that anymore they are free of ending the relationship and there shouldn't be beatings and stuff like that. Anyway it's such a complex topic and I'm happy for people as long as they are not hurting someone.

My initial concerns were about how it could backfire and even though I don't agree with us having to compromise to society standards that's a reality and it's valid for people to feel kinda bad about these type of news when they could affect their lives and the things they've been fighting for their whole lives.

[Melech 9,900]

10 minutes ago, Fernster7 said:

My initial concerns were about how it could backfire and even though I don't agree with us having to compromise to society standards that's a reality and it's valid for people to feel kinda bad about these type of news when they could affect their lives and the things they've been fighting for their whole lives.

who cares about what straight people think

We need more solidarity within the community including polyamorous relationships.