PW 333: This week in poly

What happen in the polysphere this week? Civil unions in Brazil, solo polys and Republicans on the female anatomy.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download the mp3 directly

1:00 News and host chat

  • I’ll be giving Content Creation for the Online Activist at CatalystCon September 14-16 in Long Beach

3:40 This week in poly

25:00 Happy Poly Moment

  • Ryan in Denver shares a cuddly HPM
  • Rob shares a nekked camping HPM in Missouri

29:00 Feedback

  • Joan MADE MY DAY with her heartfelt thanks for episode 330 on welcoming a third into your relationship

32:00 Thanks

Thanks to Eric, Joan and John for the donations this week!

Questions? Comments? Feedback? Email or call the listener comment line at 802-505-POLY (our new number!). And hey, why not attach an audio comment to that email? 🙂 Check out PolyWeekly at Share this with a friend or write an iTunes review!

8 comments to PW 333: This week in poly

  • […] thanks to my friend Cunning Minx for spending a chunk of this week’s Polyamory Weekly podcast telling her many listeners about this blog! I’m so honored! I’ve loved Minx’s […]

  • When women are tense, uptight, or scared, then we cannot get pregnant, huh? Well, now I feel silly for getting a tubal ligation! I could just stay infertile by listening to Republican quotes about how my reproductive system works; knowing that those people influence national health policies makes me plenty tense, uptight, and scared.

  • Minx, thank you SO MUCH for giving such a thoughtful and kind mention of my new blog,, in this podcast! Your support and encouragement means so much to me.

    Following the example of your listener Joan, I just put a healthy tip in the PW tip jar — and you deserve it, for all you do for the poly community — and for the larger society which really needs information about alternatives to monogamy! You rock 🙂

    I was especially touched by the feedback in this episode from your listener Joan, who is part of a poly primary couple who learned a lot from your earlier podcast & post on advice to poly couples from the perspective of a “third” (non-primary) partner.

    I’ve gotta tell ya, that is EXACTLY what I hope will achieve. Yes, it’s important for poly/open people who don’t have/want a primary partner to speak up for themselves and expect consideration from partnered poly/open folk. But it’s perhaps even more important for poly/open folk in primary (spouse-like or live-in) partnerships to recognized their own “couple privilege,” and take responsibility for either unlearning it or at least owning up to it.

    I expanded on that thought in a new post today: “Polyamory Weekly mention, and why couples should care about couple privilege”

    This includes a short rundown of the key benefits to poly/open primary couples (and, well everyone!) from unlearning couple privilege.

    Thanks again,

    – Aggie

  • Cunning Minx


    Awww thank you! You know I’m right there with ya–it’s tough to enter an existing relationship. While I don’t need babying or kid gloves, one of my goals is to have folks have the ability to be able to see things from the perspective of the new partner and act with compassion and consideration. Loving your new blog; more power to ya!

  • Marcus


    I’m glad you are around, I am thrilled you are making your voice heard. I’ve listened to a number of your podcasts and, as far as tone/pace/content are concerned, you are the tops.

    This episode irritates me, however. At the beginning of your attack you identify the person who prompted it, but then you classify the knowledge of “men” and at one point “old white men” as your central antagonist. I assure you that my gender, nor my age or ethnicity (old and white, fyi) are defining characters in this argument.

    Since you have the ability to be precise about the target of your argument I suggest you use it so you do not absently include the rest of us in the attack. “Right wing nutjob”, “Rich, soft, Senator”, or any number of insults would be sufficient to call out your opposition while avoiding calling out… well… not to put too fine a point on it but… me.

    You have not marginalized me in any noteworthy way. I am on your side (as is any thinking adult human). I simply want to point out that, when making attacks one should be careful to announce who they are attacking and not suggest vagaries as their intended target.

  • Cunning Minx


    Hey, thanks for the comment. My apologies. I do tend to look at Congress and see a sea of sameness, which looks to me to be all old white guys. It’s true that the nomenclature is not entirely accurate and that I could certainly be more precise. I’ll admit that sometimes I get too lazy to specify the “older, entitled, wealthy, white privileged Congressmen whom, coincidentally, I’m convinced are all keeping secret gay underage lovers.” 🙂

  • Marcus

    I can’t argue that congress is a rich white dude kind of group – I would argue that the main restriction of that group is that they are rich which makes it less about their gender and ethnicity than most would like to admit. I suspect that a group of rich black women would continue to act in a similar fashion against anyone who was not of their ilk.

    I think your show is fantastic, and honestly was just hoping to offer a nit-picking opportunity for growth. I’m going to keep listening and learning – you have already taught me a great deal.

  • […] Earlier this year Cunning Minx wrote eloquently about this in and also discussed this in Polyamory Weekly podcast episode 333. […]

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Make a Donation

Poly Weekly Playmates!

Wanna play?
CatalystCon West '15

Poly Weekly on Facebook

Poly Weekly on Twitter