For three days only, from February 13 to 15, 2026 AIRE will offer its signature, limited-edition Valentine’s Day Experience in Toronto for the very first time. Centred on water, stillness, and shared ritual, guests are invited to embrace the luxury of time and lose themselves in a journey through AIRE’s magical thermal baths, along with relaxing massages for two performed with a soothing floral oil and warm basalt stones. Hydrating eye patches, a nourishing hair mask, chocolate treats, and more complete the decadent experience which is now booking reservations.

A Temple of Relaxation

Inspired by the tradition of ancient Roman, Greek, and Ottoman baths, the AIRE experience always takes place in restored historical buildings located in city centers. Toronto is no different.

Amidst the timeless charm of the Fashion District, AIRE finds its home in a historic Edwardian Classical building, once the office and warehouse of the Copp Clark publishing company, famously the producers of Canadian Almanac maps and textbooks, popular board games like Monopoly, and the ‘Wonderful Wizard of Oz’ series of books dating back to the early 1900s by Frank L. Baum.

A designated heritage site, AIRE Toronto’s original wood structure and towering pillars remain, preserving the character of its storied past. Today, vintage books and printing presses offer subtle echoes to the building’s history that now generously embraces the art of relaxation. Spanning 23,000 square feet, AIRE Toronto is an oasis of nine thermal baths and a range of distinctive design elements and amenities where the aroma of orange blossom fills the air.

Since ancient times, the power of contrast therapy—bathing in water at varying temperatures—has been revered for its profound physical and emotional benefit including stress reduction, a rebalancing of the body, and a boost in circulation. Guests move through the space at their own pace, guided by candlelight, silence, and the murmur of water.

AIRE Toronto Highlights include:

• The Palestra Outdoor Bath — a warm open-air bath with ever-changing sky views.
• The Flotarium — a saltwater bath where guests float effortlessly, as if suspended in time. Underwater music and a sense of stillness invite you to disconnect and journey inward.
• The Balneum — get carried away by the energy of these dynamic jet baths as they revitalize the body and ease muscle fatigue.
• Tepidarium, Caldarium, and Frigidarium baths — each reveals a distinct sensation of temperature, texture, and tranquility

Additional features include a dry sauna, steam-filled vaporium enriched with essential oils, massage rooms, and warm marble beds, with the entire environment intentionally intimate and removed from the pace of the city. In celebration of Valentine’s Day the welcome lounge will be further transformed with lush florals adding an elevated aura of romance from the moment guests step inside.

The Gift of Relaxation

Gifting AIRE means offering an immersive wellness experience. Gift cards can be purchased for individual experiences or for couples, providing flexibility for both solo escapes and shared moments.

Physical gift boxes are presented in beautifully designed red boxes, making them a tactile option for those who want something meaningful in hand. Digital gift cards provide instant delivery, for last-minute gifting without sacrificing thoughtfulness.

Reservations and gifting are available at beaire.com. The limited-edition Valentine’s Day Experience is available from February 13 – 15, starting at $680 for two. Coming Soon, a unique wine-soak experience. Check website for updates.

AIRE Toronto is located at 510A Front Street West in Portland Commons.

The post AIRE Ancient Baths – Experience A Romantic Escape Hidden Inside One of Toronto’s Most Historic Buildings appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

The publishing industry is at best challenging for LGBTQ2+ people to navigate, given the demand for stories that a heteronormative and cisnormative industry deems best suited for readers based on demand, regardless of the narratives missing and needed by the community.

There’s a certain expectation that people bring to stories about members of the Queer community, specifically Trans and gender diverse folks. Most of the interest comes from the implied currency exchange for access to stories of bodily changes and transition, or the deconstruction of the diverse gender identites we worked so hard to build for ourselves. This is at times coupled with the need some cisgender folks have, to make us justify our gender identity and expression. There are more than a few of these stories available, but the seemingly insatiable desire to use Trans narratives as an entry point into details about transitioning, anatomical parts and answering inappropriate questions feels unending.

It isn’t so much what it is, but what is isn’t, that makes Trans Like Me such a powerful read. Indeed, by the title alone, “Conversations For All Of Us,” may seem as though it graces the stage for the benefit of cisgender readers, mostly. While reading it though, I felt seen, where a writer’s vocabulary provides an antidote to the gaze that demands an explanation for why you aren’t the kind of Trans person they’re used and need you to be, so they don’t have to do as much work to truly understand what gender identity means. The book remedies the ache that I felt while spending a lifetime so far, trying to figure out how to make cis- work for me, when it was never meant to. I read it and remembered that non-binary is a “thing” and I’m just as valid doing that in my own way, than seeking validation through the perfection of how others expect me to perform my identity.

This is CN Lester’s power in a book that may not be the longest book you’ve ever read on the topic, but one that is potent enough to ensure that its contents make the most of every single page. Each chapter focuses on an aspect of what Trans people experience and even where its contents are a familiar song, the author manages to find new ways to sing it.

It was also refreshing to read a Trans perspective about the popularity of firsts in the community, of which the author wrote, “It’s not about not caring about our milestones, but it is caring about the way in which the need for these firsts overrides the accurate recording of our history.”

Trans Like Me also speaks to the many ways the LGB communities, whether intentional or not, forget that there is a “T”, addressing the impact of this erasure and ignorance. We’ve all seen it in some form or another, where LGB people will be represented and called “LGBTQ+” and heteronormative tables congratulate themselves on their inclusion, assuming that they just know what the experience would be like for someone who is Trans. The author reminds readers that they don’t and this absence from conversations in the community to which Trans people belong hurts on a personal level, and it hurts the movement towards LGBTQ2+ equity, too.

Lester’s personal experiences punctuate the book with the precision of a writer who understands the power of a well-delivered memory or anecdote keeping the beat to the rhythm their words are creating. More than informative and comforting, it was well written. The book’s content isn’t all-encompassing but this is also its beauty. It talks about the author, CN Lester’s life experiences in a context removed from what society has often used to measure the value of Queer and Trans stories in publishing.

It was also satisfying to read about Magnus Hirschfeld’s Institut für Sexualwissenschaft whose books, research and evidence were destroyed in Nazi Germany, erasing the beginnings of LGBTQ2+ acceptance and rights. These accurately recounted pieces of history are often missing from the cisnormative narratives that many publishing companies look for because of their popularity and yet they remain the very things the community needs to better understand itself. By virtue of this chapter and many other parts of the book, it was refreshing to know that as a non-binary person, the “conversations for all of us” portion of the title was heavily weighted primarily towards the Trans and gender diverse community.

If you’re looking for a book to learn the details and common narrative of cisgender exploration into the Trans survival story, you will need to look elsewhere. If however, you’re seeking a book that flows like catching up with a friend over tea, seamlessly moving from the personal to the big picture, this is indeed, a conversation for you. Also, if you’re beginning to understand what the specifics of “certainly not cisgender but I’m not sure what this means for me,” this is necessary reading to get an understanding of the nuances of the community the awareness of your gender identity locates you within.

The world loves to elevate the voices of Trans people who look and sound like the Trans subject the media has acclimated them to, but as with other remedies to this problem, Trans Like Me provides an additional narrative to this way of thinking.

This powerful recognition of the multidimensionality of Trans expeirences can be best summed up by CN Lester’s words, “We talk of an LGBT umbrella, but not of those LGBT people who cannot seek shelter beneath it because we have narrowed our protections down to the point that only the few are covered. We have been taught to weigh up lives and accord them value, and we turn that tactic on each other. When we feel anger, we direct it toward the most vulnerable members of our communities for their failure to be ‘respectable’ enough to toe the party line, to make themselves acceptable to those who hate us.” 

Trans Like Me exceeded any expectation I had for such a small volume, but it proves over and over again that its words are indeed part of a conversation for all of us.

Trans Like Me by CN Lester will be released on June 19th, 2018 but is currently available for pre-order.

The post Book Review: “Trans Like Me”, by CN Lester appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

PPM: There are so many ways that we can misplace our understanding of what being oppressed means and where intersections fall for people. How do you find this operating in the poly community because these relationships aren’t as popular in the mainstream, compared to monogamy.

Eva Dusome: We all have to understand that because we all come from somewhere and our power and privilege is often invisible to us. It’s very hard to be quiet about it and listen to why it was problematic. Many people want to get defensive about it and are upset about it. Even people in our poly communities will say we’re oppressed but we’re not. We’re not oppressed people because of polyamory. There’s certainly a misunderstanding with others and there’s certainly a component of our community that’s been targeted, lost jobs and families. They are often the ones that have the least privilege. It is not often the white rich polyamorus you see on prime time TV- those aren’t the ones getting attacked. Those are the ones who are working 2-3 jobs and can’t get out to meetup events we host because they don’t have access to it.

PPM: There’s that sense of community they’re missing and monogamous folks just inherit it. I wish more folks understood the way that operates even in terms of whiteness. People don’t understand that you just inherit these privileges and it’s privilege because you don’t have to think about whether or not you have it. Also that it’s okay to sit with discomfort when you’re called out on that too.

ED: People get defensive right away and say things like, “I’m not racist!” while forgetting about the micro-aggressions that occur, and we’re not talking about a long period of time ago. We are talking about how in our time frame and generations some of our family were discriminated against and you can’t look at some families success or lack thereof, you can’t help but go back to the 1920’s and 30’s. That sense of community is why we’ve grown the poly community to what it is now and people really enjoy events. For some people our meetups are the only safe space they can be polyamorus and go to an event with 2 or 3 of their partners.

PPM: Something I wanted to ask about, was something I wrote earlier that introduced some of these concepts while putting the disclaimer that I was monogamous, which I’m understanding can be really problematic. I want to include this in the article that we’re addressing the way it was worded because some folks might be very offended.

ED: What I can see it leading to is a little bit of internalized shame as if you’re saying, “Because I’m talking about polyamorus or open relationships, I don’t want my audience to think that I do that. It’s a little bit of optics, in that, how are people going to view me after I talk about this. It’s also a little bit of, “Let’s ground ourselves in some confidence that we can talk about different things and that doesn’t mean we’re all living them, outing ourselves in the process.” Just because you talk about it doesn’t mean you have to live it, which is just you using a platform to elevate it. Instead of saying, “I chose a monogamous way,” you could say, “This is a concept I’m using my platform to elevate.” It really does clarify that it’s not the life you’re leading but that you also support it or see it as a bad thing.

PPM: I’m sorry for the way that may have hurt folks in the poly community. I won’t try to defend it because it’s just problematic, end of story and I really appreciate you taking the time to explain this for me and others, too. 

ED: It’s a little micro-aggression people do without realizing it- we all do them. Something will come out of my mouth and I realize that I said something problematic. I tend to lead my life in a non-hierarchical fashion so I do find that I come out with things that are anti-hierarchy, and I’m not trying to bring any harm to people who are choosing that, but I would like to expose why it can be problematic. Every single thing we choose in a lifetime has the ability to be problematic, even my non-hierarchical way- people have used that to not commit and treat their partners as disposable. There are components that we need to be aware of all the way around.

PPM: Building on this, how would you prefer that people do talk about it. Once it’s out there, and quotable, people can circle back and hopefully learn how to be more compassionate.

ED: I think that talking to people who are polyamorous and talking about how it’s a positive thing in their lives is important. When I explain my polyamory to people the first thing they say to me is, “Oh I could never do it.” My response back is always, “Nobody is asking you to.” Checking that idea of always having to come to your own defense because it’s coming from a place of being threatened that you’re being told monogamy is wrong. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of people in non-monogamous relationships that come down on monogamy and we often call them the elitists, who say that polyamory is more “evolved” which isn’t the case at all.

I couldn’t imagine the type of challenges that I would face in monogamy. I’ve been monogamous and I know that type of faith, commitment to really work out whatever comes your way with another human being while knowing that you’re going to change, knowing that you’re going to face these challenges takes tremendous effort and dedication. I don’t think monogamy is the easy way out by any means. It certainly can be if you’re doing it by default and on automatic.

It’s like driving a car that’s automatic or stick shift. I prefer to be changing the gears, whether in conscious monogamy or conscious non-monogamy. I have plenty of monogamous friends in my life who have examined their options and still landed in monogamy because it’s what’s worked for them. I can respect them because they looked at options.

PPM: Looking at those options can be such an awakening because a lot of folks just never consider it, not because they’re discriminatory but because it’s never been on their radar whatsoever. I hope that with this interview, more people talk about it and think critically about their judgements. Thank you so much for talking with us and for advocating so powerfully.

ED: Thank you as well.

The post Discussing Consensual Non-Monogamy and Polyamory with Eva Dusome (Part 2) appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

There are many facets to transitioning which, when misunderstood or erased from narratives, can create barriers when those services aren’t covered by health insurance or OHIP in general, despite their impact on overall well-being for members of the community.

While interviewing Melissa, I also had the opportunity to speak to a client who wished to remain anonymous, but who wanted to contribute their experience and knowledge to the conversation.

PPM: What services do you offer clients? How can they access those services?

Melissa: We offer transgender (MTF and FTM) voice and communication therapy which includes helping individuals on the gender spectrum to find a congruent voice that matches their Self. This can be achieved through pitch and resonance training. Aside from the voice, we also help clients to align their non-verbal communication with their gender identity.

Clients can access these services through our Toronto-based clinic (Bathurst & Bloor). Services are confidential and often covered by insurance.

PPM: Why did you decide to pursue voice therapy?

Anon: I wanted more pitch flexibility as I sometimes felt a bit uncomfortable with my more characteristically male voice; especially when speaking with people I don’t know.

Do you think other folks are unaware that the services exist?

Anon: I think that’s likely. And more than knowing about their existence, I would emphasize the benefits and all the areas of life it can touch. For example I found some buried emotion in my throat and face, which I’m glad to have released – I wouldn’t necessarily have discovered that otherwise. Also would emphasize voice in the larger sense, since Trans folks maybe more than others benefit from being comfortable with their voice – even with what they are ‘saying’ in the form of their transition.

PPM: What about transitioning do you wish more cisgender folks had compassion for, as a service provider?

Melissa: Cisgender folks must recognize the immense bravery and strength it requires to transition. Transitioning is a logistical ordeal and at the same time a deeply emotional journey. Voice and communication training represent only one piece of a much larger puzzle. I am fortunate to work with transgender folks and to see their hard work turn into joy when they find their congruent voice – most cisgender folks don’t have the opportunity. And, if they did, they would as I do, better respect the process of transition.

PPM: How can speech therapy help folks in transition?

Melissa: Voice and communication therapy for folks in transition is about helping align the Self with the voice and communication. The way our voice sounds, our intonation, our speech patterns, in conversation or on the phone, gives the listener an impression of who we are. Our goal for folks in transition is to align your sense of who you are, with how you present from a communication standpoint.

There is no rule about when during the process of transition one should start voice and communication training. For some, it’s their first transition step and others it’s their last

What are you liking about the experience so far? Anything different than you expected?

Anon: I didn’t expect the role the emotional/personal journey would play in the therapy and I love that. I also liked that it was very client centred and flexibly responsive to my personal needs and goals.

How will achieving your ideal voice help you?

Anon: I feel I have more flexibility with pitch and resonance, and this has translated into huge improvements in my singing voice as well. Psychosocially, I feel more comfortable in my body and feel less shame in relation to my voice. I am more confident in more situations.

PPM: Does speech therapy just serve to reinforce gender binaries, because folks are trying to sound more masculine or feminine? How does it fit into the gender spectrum that doesn’t rigidly define gender roles?

Melissa: I can only speak for my clinic is this regard, where as a team we embrace non-binary goals and often work with clients to move away from stereotypical “male” and “female” indicators in voice and communication. During our assessment process, we work with the client to establish their goals, and where on the gender spectrum they would like to go with their communication. We ask clients to find voice idols, people whose voices they like, then we work to deconstruct the liked voices to truly understand the qualities that we are working towards.

PPM: How does speech therapy work in concert with other therapies and tools, to help affirm someone’s gender identity?

Melissa: We work in concert with other tools that our clients are finding helpful and other therapies, like psychotherapy and medical. Collaboration among service providers is a truly important quality of our work. This means we readily coordinate our schedule with other appointments that come up during transition, for example, surgery, which requires clients to take time off.

What would you say to folks considering speech therapy but who aren’t sure that it would help them?

I would say, ask yourself the following questions and if you say yes, then voice and communication therapy may help you.

Do you feel that your voice, speech and communication could reflect your gender identity better?

Do you feel nervous speaking on the phone?

Do you like your voice and the way you communicate?

PPM: Are there any ways which allies can help serve the Trans, non-binary and Two-Spirit communities through the speech therapy work you do? How have you seen allies “show up” in the speech therapy area of gender identity affirmation in the past?

Melissa: The community can support the Trans, non-binary, and Two-spirited communities through providing funding and safe spaces to work on voice, speech and communication therapy. This is one of the biggest hurdles in getting access to people who need this service as TGNB people are over-represented in the low-income population. Within my clinic, we’re currently doing one-on-one voice therapy and workshops for folks in transition that is a pay-per-service model. Nonetheless, I’d love to see allies support more TGNB folks through providing funding and space for voice and communication work.

Sherbourne Health Centre recently offered their space, and they hired and supported a speech therapist, who provides gender spectrum voice therapy, to run an annual voice therapy program for folks in transition. The Gilbert Centre in Barrie is also providing space and they are working on providing funding too. So we have some allied organizations who recognize this and are showing up, and hopefully more groups will start following suit going forward

Any advice to someone who is cautious about taking the first step towards their voice and communication goal?
Anon: Go for it! It’s a journey well worth taking.

For more information or to book an appointment today:

Well Said: Toronto Speech Therapy Clinic
670 Bloor St W.
#201 – Steps from the Bathurst Subway Station
Toronto, ON M6G 1L2
P: 647-795-5277

The post Well Said Toronto Speech Therapy appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

Benita Roth, author of Life and Death in ACT UP/LA sat down with PinkPlayMags to discuss the book and what it meant to participate in ACT UP/LA then, as well as what lessons the organization has for current social movements.

PinkPlayMags: What made you want to write this book? 

Benita Roth: The immediate answer is that I’m a political sociologist, and I had been active in ACT UP/LA in the early 1990s while in graduate school.  After I moved to New York state to take a job, I continued going back to LA to interview activists after the group died, and see how and what they were doing.  The larger answer is that the 25 years later, the accomplishment of direct action anti-AIDS protest is largely lost.  That story needs to be told, because it is a story of success in making social change.

PPM: How did you feel being part of the community without necessarily coming forth as such while researching it? (at least this was how I understood the context of the research taking place while the organization’s history was unfolding)

BR: I joined ACT UP/LA’s Women’s Caucus at first, because I was writing a dissertation about racial/ethnic divisions in second wave feminism in the US, and because I was taking an ethnography course.  I did disclose my status pretty quickly to the women in the Women’s Caucus, and they were fairly nonchalant about it, and in fact one of them had been taking notes on the previous meeting for a class she was taking.  I did not formally disclose to the larger “General Body,” but was in fact aware of two other UCLA graduate students who were researching the group, both men.  As I explain in the book, I used the logic that the Women’s Caucus used, which is that the General Body did not necessarily need to approve their efforts and agenda.  While I don’t think I did anything wrong, if I had to do it again, I would likely disclose to everyone all the time about the fact that I was a researcher.  I’m currently doing research on a grassroots organization here in Binghamton, Truth Pharm (www.truthpharm.org), that is fighting for greater recognition of and resources to counter the opioid epidemic in Upstate New York where I live, and disclosed my status immediately to the founder and volunteers there.

PPM: What was your experience of the AIDS crisis? 

BR: This is kind of a broad question — I think it is meant to get to something “personal” on my part — so I will just answer like this:  the personal is political.  The AIDS crisis fundamentally changed our ideas as a society about LGBT issues, and our vision of the LGBT community.  It also furthered the change that was happening, begun with the women’s health movement, about the relationship of the public to science and the medical profession, democratizing the relationship between the medical establishment and us patients.  That these changes have not been as sweeping as some of us wanted doesn’t negate the fact that they took place.  While there is still work to do on LGBT issues and on democratizing healthcare, it is the case that we think very differently about who is a legitimate part of society and what kind of care they deserve because of the activism that countered the AIDS crisis.

PPM: The book has quoted community members and therefore kept this history in their voice, which is important. When chronicling or studying LGBTQ2+ movements in the community, why is this in some ways a necessary corollary to theorizing/theory? 

BR: As a sociologist, I don’t know any way to make theory other than in dialogue with empirical reality (and I do believe there is such a thing, no matter how imperfectly we apprehend it).  That’s my training, anyway.

PPM: While reading, I couldn’t help but see many of the community’s current struggles set against another set of battles being won in various systems and structures, regarding racialized groups not always feeling welcome. Do you think that there is anything we can learn from the life and death of ACT UP/LA as it may apply to current struggles? 

BR: In the book, I argue that large-scale structural divisions and inequalities are necessarily going to affect activists, even if they are struggling to break down those divisions and rectify those inequalities.  What I would say to actors in current struggles would depend on what the struggle was, but I think we need to start with the recognition that we all lead intersectional lives about how inequalities buttress each other and created lived, visceral differences among people. What that means to me is that folks in the fray should always be actively conscious of how they construct solidarity, who is included, whose voices are excluded, who gets listened to, etc.  That kind of self-examination is hard work when you are trying to accomplish social change, and groups can fall into paralysis if they don’t keep a balance going between internal self-examination and outside-oriented action.  For many years, the ACT UPs, including ACT UP/LA managed some sort of balance, although as I argue in the book, inequalities of race/ethnicity, gender, and even sexuality were part of the groups’ internal struggles.

PPM: What lessons [d]oes the death of ACT UP/LA have for community organizers today? 

BR: I think community organizers have to think intersectionally, and really, I think they do for the most part, and increasingly so do a lot of people — the term “intersectional” is in the process of getting mainstreamed in the press, some 25 or so years after critical race legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw coined it.  The best community organizers have been thinking intersectionally even before they term came along — they’ve been looking at how inequalities interact with each other in shaping lives.  In the US right now, there has been an explosion of grassroots responses to the policies of the Trump presidency — for example, the Indivisible movement (see https://www.indivisibleguide.com/) — and I think one thing that organizers will naturally want to do is network with folks on the ground and on the Internet who are seeking social change.  ACT UP/LA grew out of networks of progressive LGBT (and other) people in LA, and it was sustained in part by those networks.  The Internet simultaneously makes networking easier, and lowers the stakes of belonging to grassroots resistance.  So smart community organizers will figure out the balance between web activism and boots-on-the-ground activism for getting the job done for their communities.

PPM: Do you believe that direct action keeps a group relevant or successful? I felt while reading that it was only once the group moved from direct action to advocacy, that ACT UP/LA’s membership and efficacy shifted. 

BR: I don’t think ACT UP/LA moved from direct action to advocacy.  I think it always had folks in it interested in both things, and some individuals who moved effortlessly between those modes of activism. Some didn’t.  But I didn’t see ACT UP/LA switching modes of resistance so much as losing steam due to a variety of factors that reduced membership. I also don’t think that “direct action” is necessarily opposed to advocacy, assuming that what is meant by “advocacy” is more routine political participation.  Direct action is a mode of resistance.  It isn’t the only mode of resistance, even if it is (usually) the sexiest kind, with the best posters, t-shirts and after-demo parties. There’s pretty clear evidence that social movement success is almost always a combination of pressure from the outside and inside, through routine and disruptive measures. Community members should use the tactics that they feel will work to solve problems.

PPM: What was your favorite part of researching and writing this book? 

BR: It’s hard to choose a favorite part of the research, because first, my participant observation with ACT UP/LA transformed me, and that was before I thought I was going to write a book on the group.  Second, I am a history nerd, and love combing through archives, even uncatalogued ones, which I did a lot of for the book.  But I would have to say that I love doing interviews the most. There is just something great about hearing people talk with passion about what they did, and what they continue to do, for social change.  I love how expressive people are, how incisive, how funny, how filled with wisdom.  I came out of every interview satisfied and with more hope for a progressive future.

AIDS Walk Toronto happens Sunday September 10th

The post Benita Roth On The Life and Death of ACT UP/LA appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

PinkPlayMags: At what point did you realize, “this is for me,” with polyamory?

Eva Dusome: It was a decade ago and about 2007 when I first heard the term open-relationships. I jumped on the internet and realized that there were many different definitions, used in the community. What I was reading about at the time was great but I didn’t think it fit me, but when I researched more about polyamory, it resonated with me.

How so?

Over that decade, I’ve been really lucky to explore that and I’ve come to realize that open can mean a couple of things depending on how people are talking about it. It can mean our relationships are opened or they are closed. I may be polyamorous but I may be closed off to new relationships because I’m saturated. You can also be polyamorous but you’re in a polyfidelitous situation, where you have multiple partners but closed off. Typically when people are using that title, they’re talking about a married couple who have decided that some idea or some element of monogamish is what works for them. It truly doesn’t describe what their relationships look like that all. All that it describes is that they’re not monogamous.

Many folks assume that monogamy means that one way of doing things and don’t understand monogamish, polyfidelity, open relationships, etc., is not done just one way. What would you say to folks trying to simplify it into one definition?

It is way more complex than that. Monogamous relationships all generally have one thing in common and that is that they are about two people. Each monogamous relationship can look differently though, and the way that people choose to live their lives and “do” monogamy is on much more of a spectrum. When you start to get into the non-monogamous side, which I like to look at as an umbrella of non-monogamy, there’s probably a dozen terms, labels and structures that can fit within that. Then there are some parts of polyamory that I really don’t enjoy or like seeing in my community. I’ve taken on more of a political stance with it. For some people, non-monogamy was their political way of life. It was the way they resisted a lot of default heteronormative that’s applied to us. Much of that has really shifted with marriage equality coming into play so a lot of people aren’t that political feel that we’re done because everybody can follow the heteronormative dream, even if you’re not straight and monogamy is a part of that.

I think that a big part of it is political and a way to say that there is no default and that we can customize our relationships which is how I describe it. Non-monogamous relationships are customized so it is whatever you agree upon with your partners.

What a lot of folks may not understand is the way that monogamy is a colonialist import and how that’s impacted our understanding of gender, relationship styles, love. What would you say to someone who’s beginning to see this historical implication and help them better understand it in that context?

It wasn’t until I started doing research that a lot of these things made sense for me. Postpartum depression for example- there was no such thing as postpartum depression until we really started to reinforce nuclear families and isolate our mothers and children. When we had non-monogamous networks, support systems and family units or units that operated more like families, there was more care taking and less of this isolation.

It was once non-monogamy as a means of survival, and necessary. Even though it’s not necessary to survival, socially it still is because we isolate and stop hanging out with friends or we only have friends we can only be friends with as couples. The friends you had before you had this monogamous relationship are seen as threats. It still is very much a hierarchical way of living which I don’t organize my life in a hierarchy. There’s certainly an element of priority- every day there’s going to be a person in need in my life that I will prioritize. It’s never always that person. There is no one default in my life that I will fall back onto, which is how we organize our lives according to monogamy and some people still put relationships at the top of the hierarchy in polyamory. It’s still this idea that our romantic and sexual relationships are the ones that are supposed to be the most important in our lives even though the reality is that it’s not always the case, especially when we factor in divorce rates and lifelong friends, you have to factor those things in. We have relationships, that are meaningful and long term that our society really devalues. Friendship in this world is really de-valued.

It’s like everything is hypersexualized and even in some dating situations I’ve had people who didn’t like that I was doing LGBTQ2+ activism because they didn’t like the idea of me being around women who might be interested. Had I listened to that I would’ve missed out on amazing opportunities that helped me personally and professionally become who I am today

Those people were seen as a threat to the couple-hood. If you haven’t had a chance yet, read More Than Two because Ethical Slut is great to get a handle on your sexuality but it’s outdated. More than two is so great because the premise that the people in the relationship are more important than the relationship. How many people compromise and sacrifice- which aren’t interchangeable. Compromise is working with your partner to ensure that you’re both happy but sacrifice actually sounds like, “I stepping on my needs to meet the needs of the relationship before mine.” It sounds really unhealthy while compromise can sometimes bleed into sacrifice. When we’re talking about our own boundaries and our own needs, we shouldn’t be compromising.

It’s this way we keep our partners down because we don’t want them to take opportunities because we’re fearful about who they might connect with. When we’re at our most passionate, in passion projects, we’re shining our brightest and people are going to fall in love with us. They will connect with us and we need to understand that we can fall in love and we don’t necessarily have to do anything about it. We can just be in awe about somebody’s brilliance that they’re sharing but it doesn’t mean it has to be a relationship, but that’s every single romantic movie that’s ever been made. It’s about, “I have these feelings, now what do I do with it.”

The movie Once was one of the only films where I’ve ever seen it not ending a marriage or relationship.

You can still be in awe and say, “Wow, this person is remarkable and I’m so glad that I could share some of these pieces of their life.” We’ve definitely skewed the idea of love and romanticism into having to be something, be it a big R relationship or a little r relationship.

PPM: So many folks rush into that feeling before they understand more about the person they’re experiencing. It’s just a feeling though, that’s very fleeting. The idea of polyamory should be on people’s radar because it’s not just a thing for people who belong to the community. Conscious monogamy makes us kinder for asking these questions and thinking about this. It’s a situation where everyone can win but some folks are so afraid to admit that this is a valid way of being in a relationship.

It’s that scarcity mindset and abundance mindset. The idea that everybody wins, that you just mentioned works, but if you’re coming from a place of scarcity you think of life with a pie with 8 slices and therefore you don’t have anymore. We are however, human beings who are infinite in our energy. We only have so much resources, time and energy in a day but we get more days so we can renew. Sharing those resources may deplete them but I’m also receiving them from other people who energize me. It’s one thing you hear from a lot of poly interchanges and networks, that when people spend time with one partner and then come back to another partner, they come more energized. They’re not as depleted unless there’s a lot of emotional labor happening around one relationship or partner vs. another, it will impact what that person has left.

We all have different levels of what we can engage in so we have to keep that in mind for sure. They can get complex because we are talking about people’s emotions and we are talking about going against the grain of what we’ve been taught so we’ve been conditioned to believe certain things. When we’re going against them, the self-doubt will naturally creep in. If we don’t create those other support systems, there are others who are living non-monogamous lives but aren’t out about it, they end up surrounding themselves with a lot of isolation. Maybe they have friends who are non-monogamous and not talking about it. I wish we could get to a place of being able to be open about how we want to customize our lives and that monogamy wasn’t always the default.

It’s no less valid but it’s just less common but people seem to take that as meaning that it’s not normal. What would you say to people looking to create more safe spaces to be open but who don’t know where to start because they’re not poly?

What you’re really asking is how someone is an accomplice more than just an ally to this even though it may not be where they want to go with it. I think that one key factor is always education. There are lots of articles out there now, like this one, then educating themselves and slowly, as they feel comfortable and when these conversations come up, whether at work or with families, introduce these concepts to family in a non-threatening way. Some people want to jump to the, “It’s not for me, BUT…” and that can sometimes downplay it because it’s still shrouded in shame. It’s like saying, “it’s not for regular people like you or I but there are people out there that do this.” So another point would be to watch the language so we’re not stigmatizing further. We have these social media outlets now so that we can share articles, podcasts or YouTube videos very easily, to say, “Here’s a perspective you may not have thought about.” Many people with power and privilege are able to do this for many other areas of our society and this could be one of them as well. It could be part of that breaking open our relationship options. I have two children and I want them to be aware, to know that monogamy wasn’t the default and that they could explore different ways.

We’re certainly given these scripts that work for some people but they don’t work for everyone and the relationship escalator, is the concept behind default monogamy and riding that escalator with one person until death. It’s the only way you know you’ve successfully ridden the ride and it’s kind of sad to me that your partner dies and you’re able to say, “Yes, I did that right!” Not all relationships are built on longevity. I used to say often that what I strive for as a healthy relationship and if it’s healthy, then longevity takes care of itself. I also say that with a disclaimer that there are a lot of dysfunctional and abusive relationships that have staying power as well. Longevity is never a factor in success.

Stay tuned for part two of our in depth interview, for more great information and thought-provoking conversation.

The post Q and A With Eva Dusome: Consensual Non-Monogamy, Polyamory and Poly Toronto appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

Those belonging to the Latinx community noted that this memorial held meaning beyond the Orlando massacre. One Argentinian member of the community, Andres Ignacio Torres commented that, “The blending of Latinx culture and queerness was profound to me. The highlights for me were definitely the Spanish speakers, spoken word poets, the indigenous speaker whose attendance was very important as the Canadians that we are, and just the community vibe that night in general.”

When asked about what the issues were, he also noted, “The only issue I had with the evening were these two White men who were drunk and abusing the space by shouting things about cops needing to be at Pride and “all lives matter”. It brought a few people to frustration and tears and it thoroughly upset many of us. Other than that I didn’t have any issues with the evening.” 

Torres however, had other sentiments about the night. “I have heard some of the issues regarding the entertainment and food establishments that were present, and I don’t necessarily agree that their attendance was problematic. The organizers tried to bring the community together by doing what Latinx people do, which is celebrate our culture.” 

Torres commented, “There is so much pressure when handling events that surround an impact on a marginalized community, and rightfully so. Especially when people of colour are involved, there needs to be extra care in how it is presented, and individuals of said communities must be part of the organizing process to avoid any misrepresentation of what’s important to them. This is just due to a product of misrepresentation and rough history surrounding People of Colour and any marginalized community. We are still fighting for representation so we must make sure it is the right kind.”

Torres was emphatic though, about the fact that it was a space for everyone, when asked about some of the sentiments that White folks felt unwelcome. “The entire LGBT+ community was shaken to its core by the events at Pulse. Yes, the Latinx community was hit the hardest, and yes many were Latinx people of colour, but when it comes to grieving, I believe we all need to stand together when our communities get hit like this, because death unites us all and this reminded us we are all human and bleed the same blood. As a White-passing Latinx person, I would personally feel offended if I were asked to leave because I wasn’t dark enough.” 

He went on to emphasize the importance of keeping the space open to all, “My Latinx culture and heritage has been questioned my entire life. My parents were both born in Argentina and my first language was Spanish. I am treated like any White person until they hear me speak Spanish or they see my name on my resume. I am then seen in a different light and treated drastically different. I deserve my place with my Latinx community and no one can tell me otherwise.”

There were some however, who believed that the night could’ve gone differently. It’s hard not to wonder whether it was simply a difference in cultural understanding and knowing what this particular event might mean for the community, beyond the Orlando memorial.

Trans and non-binary educator and advocate, Rachael Kriss noted however, that “I attended the ‘memorial’/vigil as I wanted to show my support and share my feelings of grief with my local community in solidarity with the victims and families and all those affected by the events of last year. The reading and unveiling of the mural was moving. Being a ‘White Trans woman’ I felt less than welcome.”

Francois Gaudreault, who organized the memorial and vigil last year after the horrific events transpired, posted the following on his Facebook page after this year’s event – ” I apologize for encouraging you to go to the most thoughtless, disrespectful, and insulting memorial that has ever been held.” He also stated, “Next year I promise an actual memorial that will honour and respect the victims.”

Going into the last few weeks of Pride Month, it’s worth considering whether just making space is enough and whether or not allies and accomplices need to keep a mind that’s as open as the spaces QTBIPOC communities occupy.

If we are to truly include everyone, we must make equal space for all parts of a community, especially when it may not look as familiar as that to which we’re accustomed. The night of the event, the real story was about how our community collectively carries the weight of violence, like the shooting at the Pulse nightclub that Latinx night.

When we get into issues of who is best suited to tell the story of grieving hearts, other than communities who were predominantly impacted, simply on the basis of how it appeals to everyone, we run the risk of tuning out the voices of those most impacted, in favour of stories that are more familiar.

Torres, though not able to speak for the entire community, summed up the experience well, based on several social media posts, when commenting that, “I honestly was impressed with the approach to the evening. I did not think Toronto would take as much care as they did in having all shades of Latinx voices represented. Not only did they cater to the Latinx community by having Spanish speakers, but they also had a Portuguese speaker and an ASL communicator.”

Grief is a heavy weight to carry, and especially after Orlando. We’re all reminded of the fact that it’s not the differences in how we do it, but the fact that we are the same in the face of violence like that which motivated the Pulse shooting.

Editor Note: Huffington Post article on the use of the term Latinx, as opposed to Latino or Latina.

The post Latinx Visibility At Toronto’s Pulse Memorial appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

I was at a backyard barbecue once, speaking with someone about the purpose of who benefited most from monogamy. (further proof that I also have no idea how to do small talk). We were talking about books I recently read, More Than Two by Franklin Veaux and The Ethical Slut by Dossie Easton and Janet Hardy, in which these and more complex questions were addressed. This wasn’t a debate as such, but I was more in awe of the fact that it was the first time I was having a discussion about it, rather than trying to defend the rights of others to practice it.

I came to realize that my own fears of being hurt left me unable to consider what healthy consensual non-monogamy might mean for others and my own relationships if I were to put it into practice. I realized that I hadn’t considered monogamy as being damaging and oppressive for some folks, and that I could be complicit in that system if I didn’t give it serious thought. It surprised me, because I tried taking an anti-oppressive approach everywhere else in my life.

I had a friend tell me over dinner one night, “Lots of folks don’t even realize that they’re not actually consenting to monogamy, because they haven’t thought about what it means or whether people are really saying yes to it. They just default to it and don’t consider anything else.” 

His words had me researching more about how compulsory monogamy was used in the past as part of oppressive systems, suppressing the needs and rights of entire groups of people. It made me question whether or not I was truly monogamous. How could I know if I didn’t want consensual non-monogamy if I hadn’t once considered it? It was an area which, unlike other parts of my life, I hadn’t been intentional in asking: What do I want this to be used for, and what is its purpose in my life?

What did it mean for example, that centuries ago, “traditional” relationship styles that were betrothed for the purposes of family and financial gain, were rarely monogamous in practice? Who did that benefit the most and especially in our LGBTQ2+ community, how did that system work against those who weren’t straight, but had to live closeted in a straight world with monogamous expectations?

What monogamy amounted to was a set of societal expectations that were, in many ways, imposed on our community and others. Indigenous tribes like the Comanche people, practiced non-monogamy and because it was part of their identity, imposing compulsory monogamy was a means of assimilation that contributed to their cultural genocide. 

There are also economic advantages to following the “status quo” in your relationship style. For example, there are retreats, experiences, therapies, resources and economic advantages given to monogamous couples that aren’t even given to single folks, let alone those with multiple partners. Monogamous couples inherit a sense of community that contributes to wellness, wholeness and the formula that allows a person to truly thrive, which poly-couples are no less entitled to experience, but who may not have the same access to outside of poly-specific groups.

People can sometimes use monogamy to act out their unhealed parts wrapped up in trust issues, sinking into the safety of letting ego take the wheel. There are others whose insecurities rob them of the self-esteem required to truly see all of our partner. Why do we want someone to be monogamous with us? Is it because we cherish them and see relationship as a sacred space that we want to experience with one person, or is it because we feel that they “belong” to us?

Do we choose monogamy as a way to free ourselves and our partners, or do we use it as a way to obligate our partners to meet our needs? Monogamy can be an unhealthy form of control, wherein we unfairly expect that our partners will never be attracted to another person again, and will exist in our world for the sole purpose of meeting our needs, which is often born from insecurity. It’s easy to forget that our attraction to partners in a long term relationship will exist on a spectrum, and that being attracted to others over time is normal. Simply feeling attraction and choosing what to do with it is less about our relationship style, and more  about the values that are important to us. 

Monogamy can also be an excuse to not communicate about these issues as well, because we make the assumption that we are automatically on the same page, so we don’t create safe spaces to talk about what’s important to us about monogamy in relationships. 

There are great things about monogamy for those who choose it, but it’s important to remember that there are a variety of reasons for choosing it and equal numbers of reasons for choosing consensual non-monogamy. It’s no less valid a choice than monogamous folks, and it may be a result of previous experiences with alternatives or the very real fact that they’re just “wired” differently. 

It’s not just poly-folks who benefit from us asking questions about what our monogamy means and who it’s meant for, because if we haven’t considered how we use it, we can’t guarantee we’re not using it to hurt those we intend to love and cherish. Once we look at what monogamy means to us, or doesn’t, only then can we be truly be open to listening to the experiences of others and how they express themselves in relationships with true compassion.

Stay tuned for more posts in my From The Heart column, where I’ll be doing interviews and sharing more about the poly-community in greater depth throughout the coming weeks!

The post Reconsidering The Purpose of Monogamy appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

There’s something to be said for bringing your whole self, with all of your intersections and experiences to the table, having them recognized. Unique challenges and barriers can present themselves as part of those intersecting identities and when we make safe spaces to elevate these experiences, true healing happens. This year’s focus on Canada’s Indigenous community is an important way the Toronto’s AIDS Vigil is creating those spaces.

Steven Hobé, AIDS Vigil Committee of Toronto Co-Chair recently commented, “With this year’s theme of ‘In The Spirit of Wellness and Healing,’ we aim to shed light on the struggles the Indigenous community faces with HIV/AIDS in Canada. In 2014, Canadian Indigenous people were 2.7 times more likely to contract HIV compared to other ethnicities.”

Leonard Benoit, Client Care Coordinator in the Indigenous community, added “This year’s theme speaks to community: it acknowledges that we leave no one behind.”

We had the opportunity to speak with Leonard and Steven to learn more about this year’s theme and what we can do as a community for HIV/AIDS organizations, once Pride Month is over.

Pink Play Mags: This year’s theme speaks to the community: it acknowledges that we leave no one behind. How can we ensure we do this beyond the vigil, especially for the Canadian Indigenous Community?

Leonard Benoit: We encourage continued open and honest dialogue that addresses the needs and challenges of Indigenous people. The Vigil is an opportunity to speak about these issues and then continue the conversation in the coming months and years.

PPM: How can we ensure that all HIV/AIDS organizations are adequately serving Canada’s Indigenous Community who are “2.7 times more likely to contract HIV compared to ethnicities”?

LB: By being culturally safe and aware. It is so important that we do this without judgement. It goes back again to open conversation about subjects that sometimes might seem contentious or taboo. This is our way forward.

PPM: Can it, and if so, how can this year’s focus on the Canadian Indigenous community contribute to Reconciliation? 

LB: We need to break the barrier of stigma and acknowledge the disease for what it is and have a safe place for people to be themselves and spiritually heal and thrive.

PPM: Many young folks are far removed from what the AIDS crisis was really like and may not understand why these vigils are so important to our community. What would you say to those who have such questions?

Steven Hobé: I think it’s important for us to always honour the past and the struggles that have gone before us. We are very lucky in Canada to now have, for the most part, an accepting society. This is due to those who fought on our behalf against discrimination. Unfortunately, there still exists prejudice against people who live with HIV. The AIDS Candlelight Vigil is an opportunity to come together and reflect on our past and future — To remember, honour and celebrate those who have passed from AIDS or AIDS related illnesses, or who have given their lives in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

PPM: If folks aren’t able to attend, how can they still contribute to HIV/AIDS organizations, research and breaking stigma year-round?

SH: We are lucky to have an active social media presence with Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, and in the coming months plan on expanding our activities. We encourage people who may not be able to attend the Vigil to follow us, and keep in touch all year round. In terms of contributing, the work being done by our AIDS service organizations is invaluable, and we urge people who would like to get involved to reach out and volunteer or donate. If people are unsure of where to start or which organization to approach, they can contact The 519 for support.

Toronto’s AIDS Vigil is in its 33rd year, taking place Tuesday June 20th at Barbara Hall Park at The 519 where thousands of LGBTTIQQ2S+ community members will remember, honor and celebrate those who have passed from AIDS or AIDS-related illnesses, or have given their lives in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The event begins at 9pm.

The post In The Spirit of Wellness and Healing: Toronto AIDS Vigil – June 20th, 2017 appeared first on PinkPlayMags.

Much “new age” spirituality seems hesitant to recognize that not everyone’s experiences are the exact same and talk about why that’s important. I feel like these thoughts I’ve been wrestling with were touched on in this article which inspired the long-form post you’re reading right now.

When your spirituality recognizes that different identities create different experiences, it becomes inclusive, awakened to the real issues going on in the world around you, which truly has the potential to heal. How do you know your spirituality is for everyone? There are 4 important indicators.

People aren’t shamed for mental health struggles and led to believe that if they just try harder, they won’t struggle.
No one is less than because they can’t be what you have come to understand that “happy” and “grateful” means. It’s damaging to encourage folks to gaze inward after shaming them for mental health issues that have nothing to do with their capacity for a good life. Many folks would I’m sure, love for it to be as simple as thinking happier thoughts and having their experiences follow suit but experiences are far more complex, because identities are complex.

There was a time in my life where medication and therapy were the best answer to a depressive episode brought on by post-traumatic symptoms that teetered on disorder. No amount of meditation, visualization or changing my narrative would have changed what was happening in my body enough to make me well in that moment. Those positive thoughts, energy healing and affirmations helped, but avoiding what really helped because it didn’t seem spiritual enough could’ve actually cost me my life. I wasn’t reading about how sacred a thing it can be, to finally get a full night’s sleep and find relief from symptoms of PTSD and anxiety with the help of medication and therapy. I was reading though, about how I just needed to do more to free myself, because generally believing that we’re broken and that the systems around us aren’t, is how we keep spending money on programs and teachers.

It’s totally possible to be grateful and depressed. It’s possible to have a positive outlook but also have anxiety. It’s possible to have PTSD while being deeply and spiritually in tune with the world around you. I’ve had friends who are Bipolar too, and these experiences take nothing from their spirituality.

People understand that “sisterhood” and “divine feminine” can be transphobic and exclude gender diverse folks and it’s addressed accordingly.
Many events are transphobic and discriminatory perhaps without realizing it, because they insist on using the gender binary to express part of their experience. What about those who aren’t particularly feminine? Where and how do they experience their spirituality? Do your events naturally include Trans and non-binary folks or do attendees and organizers make them prove their gender identity?

There are un-gendered dualities in nature, but European gender constructions are often superimposed on them so that it’s less about duality and more about how you’re performing your gender. If you’re not doing it femininely enough, then, for many of these teachings, you can’t participate in the insular “sisterhood” and community that much new age spirituality creates. “Feminine”, in many circles has also been equated with truth, but what happens when someone doesn’t experience truth that way? Does it mean that they or their experiences are less true? Not at all, but it’s certainly a message being delivered through that medium.

The real questions are, why do you feel that gender is the only means of teaching what you have to say? Can you teach compassion without relying on gender stereotypes? Are you genuinely interested in gender and spirituality or is it easier because your clients are willing to spend money on it? Can you teach patience and power dynamics without relying on old masculine, feminine binaries? What’s the teaching you’re really trying to get across? What other ways can you communicate your point that don’t leave an entire group of non-binary folks out of what valuable things you might have to say?

http://gph.is/2eNuFQm

There’s no cultural appropriation in how you express your spirituality (eg: wearing bindis, “nama-slay”, “spiritual gangster”, “namaste in bed”, First Nation clothing and ceremony).
If you need to use another culture, to express your spirituality without ever partaking in the cultural traditions from which it comes and without considering the impact of your behavior of those who belong to the tradition, you’re appropriating, not appreciating. This replicates a structure that takes from those to whom those traditions belong while ignoring their right to object to how you’re using it, especially when they request that you stop.

Does your expression of spirituality need that headdress? Do you understand the significance and history of how that ohm or dream-catcher tattoo are offensive? Do you really know what Tibetan prayer flags mean, before you use them to decorate? Why do you need to wear a bindi during your meditation and yoga class? Are you aware of how claiming that you’re a shaman can hurt First Nations who build community around them and who, up until the 1980s in Canada, were unable to legally practice their tradition of shamanism? It’s important to ask yourself why you need objects from a tradition or culture you’re not a part of to fully express your spiritual experience when you don’t know the history or work to uphold the rights of those who participate in them. 

If you’re using them without respecting what they mean outside of what you think of them, it might be worth rethinking how you use them. Is it because you want to participate in the tradition, or are you using that culture for a moment because it makes you seem more spiritual than others? More importantly does it give you more social currency and mobility that people from that tradition would otherwise be denied because they belong to the culture it comes from? If so, your spirituality could be upholding more negative structures and walls, than it’s tearing down.

You’re not made to feel like it’s your fault that you experience systemic barriers like poverty, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, biphobia, classism, to name a few. You’re also made to feel welcome in spaces that are truly accessible.
Your spirituality has enough room for the experiences that aren’t anyone’s fault and it recognizes that though you may talk about positive thinking and the law of attraction, you understand that there are many for whom these concepts aren’t helpful.

Don’t get me wrong, positive thinking is helpful (I keep a gratitude journal, too) but is it always accessible when you’re working two jobs, trying to pay off debt from school and making sure that you as a single parent are taking care of your children well? No. We have to move past the experiences of privilege that all someone has to do is be more grateful or that the barriers they’re encountering are the result of some failing despite them trying everything. Arguably, our recognition of structures that create barriers creates a greater opportunity for full expression of spirituality because we can be our whole selves.

Our spiritual life could be measured by what’s included in it, but also by who is unable to participate in it. If entire groups of people cannot participate in what you believe or your expression of spirituality because of forces beyond their control is it as inclusive as you think? If your spirituality relies on denying the existence of very real, very hard and very big barriers, is it not then just another way that we’re invalidating and ignoring the experiences of others?

Sometimes it’s just not possible for someone to visualize their way out of sexism, systemic racism, homophobia/biphobia/transphobia or ableist structures because the nature of marginalization is that you can’t overcome it without disrupting the system that supports it. 

In the words of Melissa Harris Perry, speaking about similar structures….

http://gph.is/2aomedd

https://giphy.com/gifs/victim-blaming-VNHEETi6X1QOI

There are so many ways to express spirituality and it’s time we start asking ourselves whether we’re doing more harm than good with them.

Love, light and miracles,

~Cheryl~

The post Building Inclusive Spirituality appeared first on PinkPlayMags.