How to deal with being shamed by society's labels

[CTF]

CTF, what definition are you using for "social consequences"? Being ostracised by friends or family members due to your relationship choices seems like a textbook example to me.

I didn't say "social consequences", I said "societal", which was in reference to the title of the thread, and the remarks by the OP. While friends and family may be part of one's social circle, they do not wholly define society. To claim "society's labels", or "societal consequences", is to claim that judgement/rules are imposed by a much broader group than just those you associate with.

Being ostracized by friends or family is not being ostracized by society.

 

[vinsanity0]

I didn't say "social consequences", I said "societal", which was in reference to the title of the thread, and the remarks by the OP. While friends and family may be part of one's social circle, they do not wholly define society. To claim "society's labels", or "societal consequences", is to claim that judgement/rules are imposed by a much broader group than just those you associate with.

Being ostracized by friends or family is not being ostracized by society.

I have to disagree with your statement.

But to give you an example, Sprite is a teacher. She would most likely get fired if she was out. God forbid anyone find out she is into bdsm as well. And that is in super liberal Seattle.

And, yes, having a boss who doesn't like your lifestyle does have an impact on your job. That's pretty much a no-brainer.

How about parents who won't let their kids play with yours because you are obviously some kind of pervert? You are narrowly focused on cheating and mistresses. Shoot, those things are almost accepted in society with a nudge nudge, wink wink. But to be okay with letting strange men defile your woman? Well, there must be something wrong with you then.

Luckily, my kids are all grown and none of this affects them. I work for myself so I can move on if someone at work treats me badly. I'm a straight white guy so I don't have to prove myself as much. It's much harder for women, people with kids, people of color, etc.

You might be able to understand better if you were poly.

 

[Shaya]

I think CTF understands. He may identify as mono but lived through a handful of affairs and tried hard to turn that into honest poly. His writings show he tried. He's lived through poly.

CTF may have a negative opinion of polyamory as a lifestyle choice for him, and that negativity may extend to include a few select others that he feels would benefit from saying no to poly. I'd say CTF's opinion of ooly is probably inderstandable. With no disrespect to you, CTF, but your wife comes across in your writings as a poor hinge, though I see that improvements have been made.

Poly isn't for everybody. I'd argue that even amongst those open to non monogamy, polyamorists would be in the minority. CTF understands poly. I find his views equally valid, though I wonder, CTF, if you are asking if we feel polyamorists ae relatively more afraid of social consequences than actual social consequences?

 

[anamikanon]

I am bothered by society's defaults, but not the labels per se so much. I guess the circles that matter to me describe what is going on and disapprove without bothering with labels much. For example what I heard about another single mother with many male friends (I have no idea if those are actually relationships or work or what) who visit her "You see men visiting her all the time" - the implication here is actually prostitution, but no label in sight. She is a sort of friend, though not close and any time I hear this nonsense I shut it down saying all this doesn't bother me. I get visited by Spexy myself and I tell you upfront it is a relationship.

But it does have an inhibiting effect. Since I am mostly home bound - with my son being disabled, I cannot go anywhere to meet anyone often and easily - I have to consider that if I have a new relationship, that partner will be visiting me at home as well. While I am openly non-monogamous (as in I've never made a secret of my beliefs), no one has actually seen it in action. So far I am a locally well liked and respected person. What happens if I am seen to be polyamorous? Secrecy doesn't work well for me. I don't like hiding a partner and someone visiting my home will obviously be seen by others.

It was a major stressor when Spexy was attracted to someone last year. With him being openly committed to me and his family and friends knowing, at least a significant deterrent to the other relationship was that he is himself fairly conservative in beliefs and would end up explaining to a lot of conservative people that he is in a relationship locally as well as with me. There were other problems that ended that relationship, but if they hadn't, sooner or later it would hit this major wall. I am still not able to visualise Spexy coolly explaining to people that he is in a relationship with two women. To friends, maybe. To his parents? Not a chance. But I think if non-monogamy were more readily acceptable, perhaps that relationship would have fewer stresses to begin with.

Clarification: This doesn't mean that I won't have a second relationship if I meet someone special, but it seems too much headache for anything short of a person I am already convinced about. So it does add to my already "no casual sex" preference and makes relationships less likely.

 

[opalescent]

In the US, Dr. Elizabeth Shef found that when in a custody dispute, the poly parent almost always lost custody. Mostly this was because they were poly, not because of other issues. Recently but only in more 'blue' states, some judges have been more open to non-traditional parents. (People who are kinky or pagan also have this problem.) But in a custody case, the poly parent is still more likely to lose custody because of that, rather than judged for their actual fitness. If I had children, I woukd seriously consider if being on this board is too much of a risk.

In the US there are no legal protections for being poly. None. It's not a protected class. One can be fired with no legal consequences for the employer. There are no grounds to sue. The laws against adultery and bigamy, while rarely enforced, are still around and could be used at any time at the whim of a local official.

And that's not even the social punishments like ostracism or harassment.

I do believe it is true that poly people (who are also white, middle class, and able bodied) typically don't experience direct oppression very much. Governments, police and legal systems typically focus on other categories of people to punish more directly. Black people, queer people, differently gendered, disabled, poor, and immigrants are so much more likely to deal with oppressive actions.

But the risks are real. I wish more people were out and open - and we are seeing more people being out of the poly closer - but I understand when people are not out.

 

[Tinwen]

I didn't say "social consequences", I said "societal", which was in reference to the title of the thread, and the remarks by the OP. While friends and family may be part of one's social circle, they do not wholly define society. To claim "society's labels", or "societal consequences", is to claim that judgement/rules are imposed by a much broader group than just those you associate with.

Being ostracized by friends or family is not being ostracized by society.

I see in part what you mean, but I want to say that being ostracized by 'society' will always has it concrete expression as being ostracized by certain people, so the line is very thin line here between giving an example of 'society is ostracizing me' and 'these people are calling me names'.

Also, the majority opinion influences and give validation to individuals friends/family members. You would be unlikely to have any kind of problems as an atheist over here, as 50% of people are without confession - and a family who would disown their kid for not conforming to their beliefs would themselves get judged by the vast majority. I guess where you are it is much more common to reject family members deviating from the major confession.

I say I only have one real example - getting fired from certain professions. I strongly believe there would be no problem with law, even if there was protection the employer can find a lot of work-arounds.
The other example is what opalescent writes about custody.

If you need an example of labels being sticked on poly people by complete strangers - I think finding any article about poly in some internet magazine aimed at the mainstreem population and viewing the discussion would work. I may do just that when I get home.

 

[vinsanity0]

If you need an example of labels being sticked on poly people by complete strangers - I think finding any article about poly in some internet magazine aimed at the mainstreem population and viewing the discussion would work. I may do just that when I get home.

LOL, yeah. That should lay to rest any notion that poly is generally accepted in society.

 

[Spork]

Social consequences...

1. In the military, it could be used as an excuse to "burn" you. If you had a superior who disapproved of such things and found out, you would be punished, lose rank, lose pay.

2. In many states, especially "at fault" divorce states, child custody can be an issue.

3. Even moreso than gay parents trying to adopt, in many parts of the country and the world (remember, this forum is not just about the US, let alone just about blue states) poly parents would be looked upon by many as unfit.

4. It is NOT a protected class and you CAN be fired over it. Furthermore, there are places in this town where they can discriminate hiring based on religion because the organization IS religious based, such as Catholic hospital compounds. It says right in the job offerings online, even, that you have to be a person of their faith. What do you think that some of these places would say about polyamorists? Most companies now also have a clause in the hiring contract that you cannot do anything outside of work that they feel violates the values or tarnishes the "image" of the company. All it takes is a disapproving boss to decide that you walking around hand in hand with two people in public is disgraceful, and you're out.

5. My ex rented our home to friends of the family, but threw an absolute fit when he found out that they moved in the poly boyfriend, because he thinks that it's sick and unmanly to "let" your wife have sex with another man like that. He got very upset, but at least it was not in his or anyone's best interest to throw them out. But he is now scheming to move back sooner and "fix the place up" and try to rent it on the regular market for more money. He is not happy having poly going on "under his roof" even when he's in another state.

6. And on that note, rental restrictions for housing around here VERY commonly limit how many people you can have per bedroom, and how many adults can be on an application or on a lease or in a house. You MUST have an app for everyone over 18, but can only have up to two adults for instance. That might have been put in place to discourage large extended families of poor people, gangs of young people or whatever, from taking over a house...but it inadvertently also discriminates against polyfolk who are trying to cohabitate.

7. Zen's friend, I have talked about at length in my blog, is disgusted by talk of "weird sex stuff" and wants me to never mention any such around his wife or friends. I know that in my blog the focus was on BDSM, but he has also asked me not to talk about my experiences with poly, or anything sexual in general really. Meanwhile, I sat in his kitchen while he and his buddy talked in judgmental tones about the neighbor they hate, who has two kids by different men and is therefore a whore. She wasn't even poly.

8. Family or parents disapprove? That could affect inheritance, life insurance, or even the ability to fall back on familial help if needed...those things are sometimes the biggest windfall that a person ever sees in life, though many of us never will and it isn't an entitlement...I'd still say that losing that could be considered a "consequence" of being openly poly.

I could go on. But I think I've made my point. Suffice to say that there are plenty of judgmental people around, probably more in the Bible Belt than in more socially progressive places, but you can find 'em anywhere. And if they end up in a position of power over you in some way, you are damn straight that there can be consequences to your life.

If you are fortunate enough to be surrounded by people who don't really care what you do...that's great. Mostly, I am. But I still see it, and I'm not unaware of it, so I don't take my circumstances for granted.

 

[CTF]

Social consequences...

1. In the military, it could be used as an excuse to "burn" you. If you had a superior who disapproved of such things and found out, you would be punished, lose rank, lose pay.

2. In many states, especially "at fault" divorce states, child custody can be an issue.

3. Even moreso than gay parents trying to adopt, in many parts of the country and the world (remember, this forum is not just about the US, let alone just about blue states) poly parents would be looked upon by many as unfit.

4. It is NOT a protected class and you CAN be fired over it. Furthermore, there are places in this town where they can discriminate hiring based on religion because the organization IS religious based, such as Catholic hospital compounds. It says right in the job offerings online, even, that you have to be a person of their faith. What do you think that some of these places would say about polyamorists? Most companies now also have a clause in the hiring contract that you cannot do anything outside of work that they feel violates the values or tarnishes the "image" of the company. All it takes is a disapproving boss to decide that you walking around hand in hand with two people in public is disgraceful, and you're out.

5. My ex rented our home to friends of the family, but threw an absolute fit when he found out that they moved in the poly boyfriend, because he thinks that it's sick and unmanly to "let" your wife have sex with another man like that. He got very upset, but at least it was not in his or anyone's best interest to throw them out. But he is now scheming to move back sooner and "fix the place up" and try to rent it on the regular market for more money. He is not happy having poly going on "under his roof" even when he's in another state.

6. And on that note, rental restrictions for housing around here VERY commonly limit how many people you can have per bedroom, and how many adults can be on an application or on a lease or in a house. You MUST have an app for everyone over 18, but can only have up to two adults for instance. That might have been put in place to discourage large extended families of poor people, gangs of young people or whatever, from taking over a house...but it inadvertently also discriminates against polyfolk who are trying to cohabitate.

7. Zen's friend, I have talked about at length in my blog, is disgusted by talk of "weird sex stuff" and wants me to never mention any such around his wife or friends. I know that in my blog the focus was on BDSM, but he has also asked me not to talk about my experiences with poly, or anything sexual in general really. Meanwhile, I sat in his kitchen while he and his buddy talked in judgmental tones about the neighbor they hate, who has two kids by different men and is therefore a whore. She wasn't even poly.

8. Family or parents disapprove? That could affect inheritance, life insurance, or even the ability to fall back on familial help if needed...those things are sometimes the biggest windfall that a person ever sees in life, though many of us never will and it isn't an entitlement...I'd still say that losing that could be considered a "consequence" of being openly poly.

I could go on. But I think I've made my point. Suffice to say that there are plenty of judgmental people around, probably more in the Bible Belt than in more socially progressive places, but you can find 'em anywhere. And if they end up in a position of power over you in some way, you are damn straight that there can be consequences to your life.

If you are fortunate enough to be surrounded by people who don't really care what you do...that's great. Mostly, I am. But I still see it, and I'm not unaware of it, so I don't take my circumstances for granted.

Ok. Let me start off by saying that these are the types of societal consequences that I was asking about. Of course there will be circumstances where a disapproving family member might raise a fuss, but that speaks of the individual, not the society. As for the items you addressed, while it may be true that these things COULD happen, are there really a significant number of instances in which they actually do. Not to be dismissive of even one instance, but to claim that society does this, would have to indicate that it's a regular occurrence.

Now it's true, that being poly is not a protected class, and it's possible to lose a job over it, one can still sue (and probably win) if that was the stated reason for the termination. Personality differences are not protected either. Hell, it's just as within the law to fire someone for rooting for a different sports team. Most people don't realize that when a company fires someone without cause (with cause examples would be theft, showing up drunk, etc...) they are financially responsible for paying unemployment insurance, which is far worse than keeping an otherwise solid employee over a personal difference. Is it possible? Sure. Is it practical or likely? I doubt it.

As for the rental restrictions, it absolutely is due to keeping 50 people from renting an apartment. Just because it may affect poly folks, doesn't make it a slight against them.

That being said, although I'm not particularly down with the poly in my own life, I have zero interest in spoiling it for anyone else. I do not condone any injustices, but we need to make clear that they are in fact that. Which then brings the question... what do you intend to do to rectify them?

 

[CTF]

I think CTF understands. He may identify as mono but lived through a handful of affairs and tried hard to turn that into honest poly. His writings show he tried. He's lived through poly.

CTF may have a negative opinion of polyamory as a lifestyle choice for him, and that negativity may extend to include a few select others that he feels would benefit from saying no to poly. I'd say CTF's opinion of ooly is probably inderstandable. With no disrespect to you, CTF, but your wife comes across in your writings as a poor hinge, though I see that improvements have been made.

Poly isn't for everybody. I'd argue that even amongst those open to non monogamy, polyamorists would be in the minority. CTF understands poly. I find his views equally valid, though I wonder, CTF, if you are asking if we feel polyamorists ae relatively more afraid of social consequences than actual social consequences?

While I think this is unrelated to the topic at hand (societal consequences), since you brought it up, I might as well clear the air with you... I really didn't try hard for honest poly, or any poly for that matter. While there was a very brief moment of consideration in order to wrap my head around the concept of platonic love. And I was ONLY willing to be part of this on the condition that the other relationship remain strictly platonic. I refuse to use terms like "hinge" to describe my wife, or "metamour" to describe jersey.

I don't begrudge others for engaging in poly, but I am not the slightest bit open to having it be any part of my marriage. I don't know if I'd agree that I "lived through poly" as you put it, but I've sort of survived the bomb blast.

 

[Spork]

Ok. Let me start off by saying that these are the types of societal consequences that I was asking about. Of course there will be circumstances where a disapproving family member might raise a fuss, but that speaks of the individual, not the society. As for the items you addressed, while it may be true that these things COULD happen, are there really a significant number of instances in which they actually do. Not to be dismissive of even one instance, but to claim that society does this, would have to indicate that it's a regular occurrence.

Now it's true, that being poly is not a protected class, and it's possible to lose a job over it, one can still sue (and probably win) if that was the stated reason for the termination. Personality differences are not protected either. Hell, it's just as within the law to fire someone for rooting for a different sports team. Most people don't realize that when a company fires someone without cause (with cause examples would be theft, showing up drunk, etc...) they are financially responsible for paying unemployment insurance, which is far worse than keeping an otherwise solid employee over a personal difference. Is it possible? Sure. Is it practical or likely? I doubt it.

As for the rental restrictions, it absolutely is due to keeping 50 people from renting an apartment. Just because it may affect poly folks, doesn't make it a slight against them.

That being said, although I'm not particularly down with the poly in my own life, I have zero interest in spoiling it for anyone else. I do not condone any injustices, but we need to make clear that they are in fact that. Which then brings the question... what do you intend to do to rectify them?

Well, first of all I don't think that poly itself, is common enough to talk about "regular occurrences" or making anyone a protected class at this point. I mean, gay people are still fighting to keep their rights intact and gain full equality, and they're far more out in the public view and numerous, I think, than the poly contingent. I've said it before: I know more polyfolk between this forum and my kink scene, than almost anyone I know, and still consider things more anecdotal, than statistical, due to sample size against the greater number of people I know.

What am I doing to rectify that stuff? Nothing. I don't have time to be much of an activist, and I'm frankly more concerned with holding my own affairs together than changing minds that don't want to be changed.

I think that most people I know who practice poly, are middle class white people. Just by the numbers. Which means they have a lot to lose and a good idea of protecting their asses and their assets. And thus, tend to be closeted to some degree or other. This is another reason that these potential consequences don't regularly occur, is that people are aware of the risk and try to mitigate it by hiding things from those who could act against them.

I see more young, and less affluent, people being "out" and loud and proud...than people in their 30s and 40s who have climbed the economic ladder to a certain point and fear falling off in some way. And many of them will be homeowners, most likely, and so restrictions such as housing won't necessarily matter to them. Like the difference between the 22 year old waitress who plays scratch tickets (risk of losing money: high, reward: low) and the educated professional who puts her extra money into a 401K, taking a safer if less exciting path.

I think that there are risks, and I would say that what I listed earlier are the potential, possibly even likely consequences of being OPENLY poly...but I think that few people actually are completely open and "out." Those that are have probably assessed any impact of risk in their lives and decided their odds are good. But again, the risk for a polycule in Seattle, or San Francisco, are probably different from those of a polycule in Alabama or North Carolina.

 

[YouAreHere]

Ok. Let me start off by saying that these are the types of societal consequences that I was asking about. Of course there will be circumstances where a disapproving family member might raise a fuss, but that speaks of the individual, not the society. As for the items you addressed, while it may be true that these things COULD happen, are there really a significant number of instances in which they actually do. Not to be dismissive of even one instance, but to claim that society does this, would have to indicate that it's a regular occurrence.

How often do you hear about Military discharges (for example) in general, for other violations? From what I've heard from folks in the military, reaction depends on the command, so poly relationships are kept very much hush-hush unless there's reason to trust people with that information.

Then there was this zoning dispute in Connecticut.

Now it's true, that being poly is not a protected class, and it's possible to lose a job over it, one can still sue (and probably win) if that was the stated reason for the termination. Personality differences are not protected either. Hell, it's just as within the law to fire someone for rooting for a different sports team. Most people don't realize that when a company fires someone without cause (with cause examples would be theft, showing up drunk, etc...) they are financially responsible for paying unemployment insurance, which is far worse than keeping an otherwise solid employee over a personal difference. Is it possible? Sure. Is it practical or likely? I doubt it.

As for wrongful termination, IANAL, and I really get much of my legal fix from Reddit's /r/legaladvice and TWiL, but it seems as though if you're in an "employment at will" state, if you're not in a protected class, your employer doesn't even need a reason to fire you (or, more likely than not, can make up some false performance reasons). It seems that unemployment is usually denied when first applied for, making people either give up or go through the rigamarole of contesting the decision.

It does happen.

As for the rental restrictions, it absolutely is due to keeping 50 people from renting an apartment. Just because it may affect poly folks, doesn't make it a slight against them.

But we're talking about being shamed by society at large. Just because the zoning regulations in Connecticut may have been designed to prevent unlicensed boarding houses doesn't mean the people in the house weren't shamed by being targeted. Instead of being able to live quietly, they get their faces in the paper.

 

[CTF]

How often do you hear about Military discharges (for example) in general, for other violations? From what I've heard from folks in the military, reaction depends on the command, so poly relationships are kept very much hush-hush unless there's reason to trust people with that information.

Then there was this zoning dispute in Connecticut.



As for wrongful termination, IANAL, and I really get much of my legal fix from Reddit's /r/legaladvice and TWiL, but it seems as though if you're in an "employment at will" state, if you're not in a protected class, your employer doesn't even need a reason to fire you (or, more likely than not, can make up some false performance reasons). It seems that unemployment is usually denied when first applied for, making people either give up or go through the rigamarole of contesting the decision.

It does happen.



But we're talking about being shamed by society at large. Just because the zoning regulations in Connecticut may have been designed to prevent unlicensed boarding houses doesn't mean the people in the house weren't shamed by being targeted. Instead of being able to live quietly, they get their faces in the paper.

So, in other words.... we don't hear about discharge over poly because we don't hear about discharges in general? Not that I don't accept that premise, but how does that infer that there's a bias against polyamory?

As for the family in Connecticut... there would need to be an example where that many people in a comparable sized house was allowed to stay if there was no poly going on. Otherwise, it's just complaining that the poly family should be granted an exception.

As for the employee... that's unfortunate. No one should have to lose their job over it. That being said, I'm not too up to date on Australian law.

And it's not that I'm defending those practices, but it clearly doesn't appear to be as prevalent as many are making it out to be.

Side note, nearly everyone gets accepted to unemployment. And in "at will" states, it's true that a reason to terminate someone does not have to be given to the employee at the time of termination... however, the employer does have to show whether or not there was cause to do so. And if there was no cause (discovering a poly employee does NOT give an employer cause), then they are on the hook for unemployment.

 

[JaneQSmythe]

I've found sporting metaphors can help with this. For example: picking a ball up and running with it is cheating if you're playing soccer, but it's a vital part of the game if you're playing rugby. It's not the action that makes it cheating; It's the context in which the action takes place.

If I've agreed to play soccer then I need to avoid using my hands, but if I (and everyone else on the field) am playing rugby then I don't have to do so just because it'd be against the rules if I was playing soccer.

If the rules of my relationship include "you can have sex with other people" then having sex with others isn't cheating just because monogamy exists.

Like!

 

[Hannahfluke]

So, in other words.... we don't hear about discharge over poly because we don't hear about discharges in general? Not that I don't accept that premise, but how does that infer that there's a bias against polyamory?

As for the family in Connecticut... there would need to be an example where that many people in a comparable sized house was allowed to stay if there was no poly going on. Otherwise, it's just complaining that the poly family should be granted an exception.

As for the employee... that's unfortunate. No one should have to lose their job over it. That being said, I'm not too up to date on Australian law.

And it's not that I'm defending those practices, but it clearly doesn't appear to be as prevalent as many are making it out to be.

Side note, nearly everyone gets accepted to unemployment. And in "at will" states, it's true that a reason to terminate someone does not have to be given to the employee at the time of termination... however, the employer does have to show whether or not there was cause to do so. And if there was no cause (discovering a poly employee does NOT give an employer cause), then they are on the hook for unemployment.

I live in Utah, which is an at will employment state, which means that I can get fired from my job for any reason my employer wants to, unless it's protected by a specific law. It's not just other countries that have these types of rules. And unemployment, while it's better than nothing, caps out at a certain amount and even before it caps out is not anywhere near what you make at your job, so arguing that you'd get unemployment so why does it matter if you are fired for being poly isn't really a good argument. My husband was laid off last fall. He got unemployment, however, it was only a third of what he was making at his job and didn't kick in for a while because he got paid for 2 weeks by his company, had a week's vacation left, and then had to wait a week before the unemployment started. We don't live paycheck to paycheck anymore, but when we did, losing 2/3rds of his income and having no income for a week would have meant racking up credit card debt. So, unemployment or not, there are consequences to losing your job over being poly and saying unemployment makes up for them is laughable, in my experience.

 

[CTF]

I live in Utah, which is an at will employment state, which means that I can get fired from my job for any reason my employer wants to, unless it's protected by a specific law. It's not just other countries that have these types of rules. And unemployment, while it's better than nothing, caps out at a certain amount and even before it caps out is not anywhere near what you make at your job, so arguing that you'd get unemployment so why does it matter if you are fired for being poly isn't really a good argument. My husband was laid off last fall. He got unemployment, however, it was only a third of what he was making at his job and didn't kick in for a while because he got paid for 2 weeks by his company, had a week's vacation left, and then had to wait a week before the unemployment started. We don't live paycheck to paycheck anymore, but when we did, losing 2/3rds of his income and having no income for a week would have meant racking up credit card debt. So, unemployment or not, there are consequences to losing your job over being poly and saying unemployment makes up for them is laughable, in my experience.

I'm well aware there are places here in the US that are "at will" states. I'm in California, and it's the same here. The point is not that it can't happen in the US, but rather, the fact that there don't seem to be enough circumstances where it does happen tend to suggest that people are getting worked up over an essentially nonexistent problem.

As for the unemployment... sure, it's not the same pay rate one once made... however, that wasn't my point. But the employer pays into unemployment like an insurance policy. If your employer lets you go without cause, they're on the hook for far more than the $496 max you're entitled to in Utah. Without getting to complicated, their cost ends up being triple what they were paying you... and, if you had a vital position, they still have to hire & train a replacement.

It's not that unemployment makes you whole, it's that it's a tougher consequence for them than you think. No competent employer is going let you go for such a silly reason.

 

[Spork]

I've seen employers terminate someone because they did not LIKE them. They came up with a better wording in the cause that they gave, but that was the long and short real reason.

I'm not sure what the premise of your argument here is, CTF. That there are not significant numbers of people in the US who will, given a chance, judge polyfolk as being disgusting and/or immoral, and level any available consequences they can in their general direction...that it doesn't happen often and therefore is not a thing? Is that the premise?

Again...poly itself is not that common. Open, "out of the closet" poly is even LESS common. Out of those few who do that, many have analyzed their situation and decided that they can live without any judgmental voices in their sphere (deal with it or fuck off) and maybe are in situations where they are relatively safe from discrimination by being "out" insofar as they are. And that would, yes, leave a very small number who are:
-poly
-out
-vulnerable to discrimination (and still choosing to be out)
-actually experiencing discrimination.

How about this. I am, right now, sitting in my cubicle for a large international software and accounting firm, wearing my BDSM collar. I would estimate that at least 10+ of my coworkers know that I am in a D/s sort of a relationship and park of a kink community, because we have had conversations about it. EDIT: I feel LUCKY because I work for an employer that is very nondiscriminatory in its "company culture." I would not expect this everywhere.

Most of the people I know in the scene are at least somewhat if not completely closeted about these things. And we are not people who consider it merely a matter of unusual bedroom activities. It is community for us, culture, chosen family and friends...it's a big part of our lives. But most hide it, because they fear the consequences from their families, employers, etc.

A couple of the ladies I know of actually work in the public school system. Now let me just say, if it became widely known that a schoolteacher here in Colorado Springs were polyamorous, they would likely lose not only their job, but their entire future teaching career, and it would be publicized and debated in the court of public opinion. They'd probably get people on social media and the comments of news articles and so on, calling them horrible things and possibly even threatening their lives.

I consider, from what I have seen of the loud evangelical right here, as well as the way that assholes love to be assholes on the internet, this to be a VERY LIKELY outcome.

And you are saying that because you don't see it happening a lot, well...it just is not a thing?

No, merely because I have not been struck dead by lightening or a speeding Mack truck, and I don't hear news of such every day, does not mean I'm going to go climbing power poles in thunderstorms or dancing on the highway because "it doesn't happen much so it's not really a thing."

 

[CTF]

I've seen employers terminate someone because they did not LIKE them. They came up with a better wording in the cause that they gave, but that was the long and short real reason.

I'm not sure what the premise of your argument here is, CTF. That there are not significant numbers of people in the US who will, given a chance, judge polyfolk as being disgusting and/or immoral, and level any available consequences they can in their general direction...that it doesn't happen often and therefore is not a thing? Is that the premise?

Again...poly itself is not that common. Open, "out of the closet" poly is even LESS common. Out of those few who do that, many have analyzed their situation and decided that they can live without any judgmental voices in their sphere (deal with it or fuck off) and maybe are in situations where they are relatively safe from discrimination by being "out" insofar as they are. And that would, yes, leave a very small number who are:
-poly
-out
-vulnerable to discrimination (and still choosing to be out)
-actually experiencing discrimination.

How about this. I am, right now, sitting in my cubicle for a large international software and accounting firm, wearing my BDSM collar. I would estimate that at least 10+ of my coworkers know that I am in a D/s sort of a relationship and park of a kink community, because we have had conversations about it. EDIT: I feel LUCKY because I work for an employer that is very nondiscriminatory in its "company culture." I would not expect this everywhere.

Most of the people I know in the scene are at least somewhat if not completely closeted about these things. And we are not people who consider it merely a matter of unusual bedroom activities. It is community for us, culture, chosen family and friends...it's a big part of our lives. But most hide it, because they fear the consequences from their families, employers, etc.

A couple of the ladies I know of actually work in the public school system. Now let me just say, if it became widely known that a schoolteacher here in Colorado Springs were polyamorous, they would likely lose not only their job, but their entire future teaching career, and it would be publicized and debated in the court of public opinion. They'd probably get people on social media and the comments of news articles and so on, calling them horrible things and possibly even threatening their lives.

I consider, from what I have seen of the loud evangelical right here, as well as the way that assholes love to be assholes on the internet, this to be a VERY LIKELY outcome.

And you are saying that because you don't see it happening a lot, well...it just is not a thing?

No, merely because I have not been struck dead by lightening or a speeding Mack truck, and I don't hear news of such every day, does not mean I'm going to go climbing power poles in thunderstorms or dancing on the highway because "it doesn't happen much so it's not really a thing."

Honestly, I'm not really making an argument. There seems to be this assertion from poly folks there's this widespread discrimination, judgment and labeling by "society". Since I have not seen it, I asked if it were really the case, and only received assertions that it "could happen". Of course it COULD happen, but it doesn't mean it does.

It's true, people lose their job for all sorts of reasons, and employers can be very good at covering their tracks in order to avoid a lawsuit, but so what? I could lose my job for having blue eyes, and statistically speaking, the risk is identical to those losing their job due to polyamory. You mentioned knowing people who work in education that you/they "know" they'd lose their jobs... how exactly do you know this? Has someone in the same district lost their job for the same reason? Is there a history of educational workers losing their jobs? Now, I'm not in any way suggesting they be the test cases to find out... if they suspect there's a chance, then they're right to do what they feel they need to do, but don't make such a ridiculous claim to KNOW it WILL happen.

As for your lighting remark, sure... I'm not saying that you should be out there putting yourself in dangerous positions... but to put my point in the proper perspective in your analogy, I'm the one challenging those who make the claim that there's an abundance of lightning strikes despite little to no actual reports of them.

And keep in mind, this all started because of the OP claiming that society is regularly calling poly folk "cheaters" & "mistresses". Not having seen this to be as rampant as implied, I questioned the validity - only to be met with wild stories of how people "could" lose their jobs, custody, etc... no notable examples of it actually happening (outside of 1 case in Australia) though

 

[Spork]

I see your point.

I think...from my own personal life observation and experience...

It is not very difficult to get a sense of how some people you meet would be fairly sure to judge you for not conforming to certain ideals of normalcy. You hear how they talk, you get a sense of who and how they are, and you kind of know how their minds operate.

It's just part of being socially savvy.

And if you think that polyamory is widely socially accepted, then I suggest that you go find an article on poly that gets tossed around social media as clickbait (there have been a few now) and read the comments. Tons of people think that it is selfish, sick, wrong, trying to validate cheating, "I could never share MY man" and tons of moral judgments and so on. More comments than you would ever want to read.

It is not so much a matter of whether there is institutionalized discriminatory policy or practice, as the fact that these attitudes exist, coupled with the fact that you could have a person in a position of power over your life, such as an employer or parties of the legal system, family courts, or what have you... All it takes is for the two things to come together, where a person has power over you and they don't approve of your life, and you have possibly a recipe for problems.

Merely the fact that many dodge that bullet does not invalidate it.

I would say that there are many, many, orders of magnitude more, Americans who would judge poly negatively in some way, than there are poly people.

Why did I say that the ladies knew that exposure of their personal life would end their teaching careers? Because I have enough sense to see the world around me. Because I have seen other scandals involving teachers, I've seen that if word gets out into the news, the feathers fly, because I know that the districts would rather quietly get rid of a teacher if they find out they have an unusual sex life, rather than risk word getting to the kids, parents, or papers. And because I've seen enough "regular folks" pass judgment on poly people, to know that in this city at least it would be a controversy.

When I talked about being poly, back when I was with the quad, I got a certain amount of "Where are you kids when you're having these disgusting orgies" and "I can't believe you're engaging in this depravity under your children's noses" kinds of comments. There were certainly a few people who acted like I was having freaky sex on the living room floor while my kid tried to watch Saturday morning cartoons for pete's sakes. Just like when people first started trying to come out as openly gay, there were plenty of straights who thought that a man who liked other men was a sicko sex freak who probably molested kids. I don't hear that twisted shit argument much anymore but I remember my Grandpa making it back in the 80's when I was a kid.

Of course, you don't need to poly, kinky, or even gay to get this kind of shit as a mother sometimes. I've heard people judge single, dating mothers, saying that they had a revolving door of men from bars into their homes, and assuming she was bringing strangers home for sex. My boyfriend's jackass friend that I now refuse to talk to, called his neighbor a slut because she has two kids by two different men.

So if judgmental attitudes exist.

And people in positions of power over others exist.

(who could deny you housing, custody, loans, employment, whatever)

...then it only stands to reason that there is likely to be some overlap.

Oh. And my favorite...I was part of the community around the band, GWAR. And after I got divorced and started talking to my "friends" about being kinky, or poly, yeah...many of them judged me, including a number of the women. Nothing quite like a tattooed 20-something metalhead slut-shaming you for having multiple partners. But it happened! I have grown away from many of my former "friends" in that community, because we just make one another annoyed and uncomfortable now, if not worse.

 

[WhatHappened]

I had a boss that always seemed dumbfounded that I wanted to go home because he knew I was dating some women in Seattle so he just assumed my wife and I weren't together.

...a lot of people cannot wrap their heads around the concept. People fear what they don't understand. That fear can cause people to react badly.

The OP asked about 'being shamed.' A boss assuming you and your wife are not together is not what I would consider 'shaming.'

And having a different view doesn't mean anyone 'fears' anything. It means they have a different view, which may well be founded in valid reasons.

there are places in this town where they can discriminate hiring based on religion because the organization IS religious based, such as Catholic hospital compounds. It says right in the job offerings online, even, that you have to be a person of their faith. What do you think that some of these places would say about polyamorists? Most companies now also have a clause in the hiring contract that you cannot do anything outside of work that they feel violates the values or tarnishes the "image" of the company.

I think this is quite reasonable. I'm pretty sure Planned Parenthood is also going to 'discriminate against' devout Catholics. I think companies have a right to hire people who are going to further the purpose and goals of the company or organization.

....Zen's friend, I have talked about at length in my blog, is disgusted by talk of "weird sex stuff" and wants me to never mention any such around his wife or friends. I know that in my blog the focus was on BDSM, but he has also asked me not to talk about my experiences with poly, or anything sexual in general really.

This isn't about 'shaming.' He doesn't want to hear about your sex life. Presumably his wife and friend's don't want to hear about your sex life. Have we really reached a point in society where we are guilty of 'shaming' someone if we don't sit and listen to anything they want to say, up to and including what they do in bed?

Suffice to say that there are plenty of judgmental people around, probably more in the Bible Belt than in more socially progressive places, but you can find 'em anywhere.

There are plenty of judgmental people everywhere. Say the name Duggar, for instance, and a whole lot of people who call others judgmental become very judgmental and critical themselves, including calling them (or any large family) all sorts of ugly names and making offensive memes about them.

Yet these same people are often the ones to complain if others so much as look at them funny, apparently feel they are entitled to have everyone agree with and approve of their choices, and accuse society of 'shaming' them if that doesn't happen.