Most of the discoveries I’ve made on my path to polyamory have been transformational and uplifting. But since becoming a sex-positive activist and an outspoken advocate for the nonmonogamous community, I’ve also learned of a darker side of polyamory. No, I’m not talking about kinky sex in a dimly lit dungeon, as much as I’d like to be! I’m actually not referring to anything risqué from within the polyamorous community at all. I’m talking about the unwarranted shadow that society has cast over polyamorous people by forcing them to live in the closet.

“Forcing” may seem like a strong word. But with the recent exception of residents in the progressive city of Somerville, Massachusetts, all other polyamorous people in America currently have zero protection from being blatantly discriminated against. They can be denied housing, prevented from advancing at work, and even fired, all without any legal recourse whatsoever. Relationship structure does not yet qualify as a “protected class” like gender, religion, race, or sexual orientation do. This lack of social and legal acceptance has compelled many polyamorous people to hide their true identity from their coworkers, family, and even closest friends. The danger of living openly means that—aside from the occasional celebrity nonmonogamy reference—polyamory hasn’t found a foothold in mainstream culture, which in turn has created a cascade of confusion about it that needs to be corrected. The most pervasive misconception that thrives in this void is that polyamory is just about sex. But for most of the polyamorous individuals I’ve met, this creative and expansive way of loving is about deep connection, committed partnerships, reliable family, and supportive community—things that everyone deserves to pursue free of discrimination.

In the polyamorous tradition of clear communication, let’s start by defining some terms. “Polyamory” is the practice of having multiple romantic and often, though not always, sexual relationships at one time, with all parties aware and consenting. “Nonmonogamy” is the larger umbrella term under which polyamory falls, along with other nonexclusive relationship structures and practices like monogamish relationships or swinging. Nonmonogamy is often also referred to as “ethical nonmonogamy” (ENM) or “consensual nonmonogamy” (CNM), but I just use “nonmonogamy” because I prefer not to reinforce the idea that nonmonogamy is an inherently dirty term that requires a redeeming qualifier. It would feel more fitting to instead label all infidelity as “unethical nonmonogamy.” When I positively highlight aspects of polyamory, I’m not invalidating monogamy in any way, nor am I trying to suggest that all polyamorous people are virtuous and perfect. I simply want to illuminate a group of people who have been heretofore marginalized. As other recent social justice movements have reminded us, dominant groups—in this case, the monogamous majority—enjoy the privilege of not needing advocacy to overcome systemic oppression.

One foundational myth I’d like to dispel is that polyamory is always a choice, or a “lifestyle,” rather than a deep-seated orientation. The way many poly people light up when they talk about their multiple partners (and about their partners’ partners, also known as “metamours”) makes it clear that this way of loving is simply how they’re wired. One polyamorous person put it to me like this: “It’s just a fact about how I experience love and relationships. Being open feels like the most honest expression of what I want…. It’s so philosophically ingrained in my brain that I would have a hard time seeing myself as identifying otherwise.” Thinking of polyamory solely as a choice rather than an orientation is harmful because most of our country’s current antidiscrimination discourse revolves around fixed, immovable traits, like race, gender, or ethnicity. The idea that people shouldn’t be persecuted for aspects of themselves they cannot change is, at least theoretically, generally accepted. But even those like me, who feel more fluid regarding relationship style and may choose to practice polyamory when it feels right, deserve to do so without risking losing our jobs, children, or standing in society.

Even though it’s estimated that 4–5% of the US population practices nonmonogamy (that’s at least 13 million Americans), there are only a handful of lawyers in the whole country who specialize in helping polyamorous people fight the discrimination they face. Diana Adams (they/them), an international lawyer and activist who is openly bisexual, polyamorous, and nonbinary, is a leading legal expert on this emerging social justice frontier. Diana has directly contended with essentially every harmful myth about polyamory, but chief among them is the fallacy that polyamory is exploitative of women.

Society’s confusion about this is probably reinforced by the fact that polyamory shares a key prefix with polygamy, and even though both of these can technically be practiced consensually, it’s important to understand just how different these practices are. Polygamy, which is most often practiced as one man having many wives, is literally one-sided and has historically been seen in contexts that put women on unequal footing. Polyamory, on the other hand, is fundamentally egalitarian. In fact, Diana said that they actually consider polyamory to be an active expression of their feminism. They said, “For me as a feminist, I felt really strongly that I didn’t want somebody else to have property rights to decide what I do with my body and how I relate to other people.” In the past, when male romantic partners learned about Diana’s bisexuality, they assumed it meant they’d get to have unlimited threesomes. Diana had to explain that what they actually wanted was to have ongoing relationships with other people that were entirely their own rather than about a male partner’s sexual pleasure.

These questions of bodily autonomy and freedom of choice are more relevant now than ever in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s overturn. For many polyamorous people, the concept of “my body, my choice” extends beyond reproductive rights and deep into the fabric of their relationship agreements. For Sarafina Starling, a polyamorous, bisexual woman who has an incurable neurodegenerative disorder called Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, being free to use her body as she pleases is of paramount importance. Sarafina’s worsening physical limitations have crystallized just how important it is for her to have decision-making power over her own body. Expressing her bisexuality via long-term relationships with people of different genders infuses her life with vitality. Sarafina explained, “I’m disabled, which means bodily autonomy is hard to achieve at every other turn in my life. So being able to own my body and determine for myself what I will and will not engage in sexually makes all the difference. Polyamory is utter freedom to say, ‘This is what I want, this is what I do not want; this is how I would like to express my love, and who I would like to express my love to.’”

Perhaps the masses will soon understand that polyamory can be an empowering dynamic for women, but the hot-button issue of children growing up in polyamorous families will probably take longer to get on the same page about. But the flawed notion that polyamorous people prioritize sex and personal gratification over family and stability grossly discounts just how wholesome and nurturing this community can be. If you could witness the countless hours most polyamorous people devote to tough conversations about complex feelings, you might wonder when they even find time to have sex at all. It’s not uncommon to find metamours planning their mutual partner’s birthday bash. And as Diana Adams discusses in their moving TED Talk, their polyamorous community stepped up to help them through something as heavy as battling cervical cancer after finding out their insurance plan didn’t cover treatment.

The poly emphasis on community often offers children profound emotional nourishment and exceptional stability. Dr. Elisabeth Sheff, a sociologist and expert witness, has been researching polyamorous families for so long that she now gathers data from the grown children of the families she initially started surveying back in 1996. Her research shows that many poly parents excel at positive practices like honesty, strong communication, conflict resolution, and the ability to take responsibility. Dr. Sheff explained that polyamorous families’ tendency to offer children a wide range of adults they can rely on for advice and support frequently leads to children with high self-esteem and psychological well-being. She elaborated: “The now grown kids tell me they learned how to communicate, and establish and maintain networks of supportive intimates who are there for them emotionally and practically. Another significant benefit they mention is that being exposed to so many different adults while growing up has helped them learn how to comfortably and confidently interact with all sorts of different people.”

The value of these creative family constellations became overwhelmingly clear to me after a friend of mine was tragically widowed and left to father a toddler. Because he and his late wife had already started living and coparenting with another couple, the three surviving adults of the polycule have been able to offer this young boy familial continuity and consistency. But even in the absence of such misfortune, polyamorous parents’ unique support systems often extend to and benefit their children. A poly couple, whom I have personally observed to be incredible parents to their highly intelligent 14-year-old daughter, explained that even past partners with whom they are no longer intimate remain part of their family’s long-term support network. The mother said, “It’s always been about bringing quality people into all of our lives. And we like that we’re able to introduce our daughter to the concept of alternative lifestyles, just as far as knowing that there’s not one way to do this life thing.”

Nurturing this type of independent critical thinking and authentic self-expression is characteristic of many poly parents, which helps explain why I have felt so impressed by the emotional intelligence of the children I’ve met from these backgrounds. From a young age, they were taught to cultivate openheartedness while asserting and respecting boundaries, so these kids end up remarkably proficient in the language of complex human dynamics, much like children who learn foreign languages from birth. Critics often assume that polyamorous parents’ open approach to sexuality must negatively affect their kids. From what I’ve seen, it’s quite the opposite. The sex-positive attitude poly parents tend to maintain helps them model shame-free communication about awkward subjects, which only encourages their children to bravely share their fears and questions about the varied and often weird experience of being human.

Dr. Sheff also said that polyamory allows for a unique type of stability for children because parents don’t necessarily need to sever their relationship and shatter the family unit when they want to pursue a connection with someone other than their coparent. She explained that “being able to expand the family and conglomerate into a larger, more supportive network— instead of breaking it up and chopping pieces off—is actually, in a way, a more ‘traditional family.’ It recreates that strength of community we used to get not only from our families, but also from religious interaction. We need a village. The pandemic made that abundantly clear to everyone with children.” The value of pooling financial, emotional, and intellectual resources should not be underestimated. As my friend’s needlepoint pillow so wisely puts it: “Monogamy? In this economy?!”

Dr. Sheff explained that the most noteworthy hardship poly families face is actually stigmatization and erasure from society. This could be anything from harassment at school to something as traumatic as custody loss, especially in politically conservative states. Diana Adams, who refers to Dr. Sheff’s research in litigation, explained: “Research shows that kids need the stability of parental figures who don’t come and go, and who treat each other with respect. And it doesn’t really matter whether that’s mom and dad, or two dads, or three moms, or mom and grandma, just as long as it’s stable and consistent. The same kinds of arguments claiming it’s inappropriate to raise kids in a polyamorous family were also once used to disparage interracial couples and monogamous couples who live together but aren’t married.”

Diana has worked on a staggering number of child-custody cases where a parent is at risk of losing their children because of some form of sexual shaming. Whether the parent has adventurous desires listed on a FetLife profile, or is simply in love with more than one person, the decisions in these cases often end up boiling down to the prejudices of the presiding judge. In family law, definitions of terms like “best interest of the child” are incredibly subjective, so depending on how conservative a county is, Diana can predict with disturbing accuracy whether the judge will rule that a loving parent loses access to their child. Diana explained that attacking a coparent for their sexuality in an effort to restrict access to their child frequently maps with abusive relationship dynamics. Diana’s line of defense in those cases has been “refocusing on the fact that my client, however titillating their sexuality might be, is the one who’s actually focusing on the best interest of the child rather than trying to destroy their coparent out of spite.” Sadly, one of Diana’s main pieces of advice to victims of this kind of persecution is to move to a more progressive state if they have the means and ability to do so. Obviously, the vast majority of people do not, which is another major reason relationship-structure nondiscrimination policies are so urgently needed.

At Diana’s New York–based nonprofit, Chosen Family Law Center (which I have recently joined as a volunteer board member), they provide the polyamorous community with free legal services and also advocate for legislative policies that will safeguard the rights of all different kinds of LGBTQ+ and nonnuclear families. Diana has been getting calls about employment loss nearly weekly for the past 15 years, and that’s just from the people who have the wherewithal to figure out how to contact them. I’m usually a fan of irony, but this gut-wrenching paradox infuriates me: While polyamorous people work hard to be open within their relationships, they’re rarely able to be open about them. Even many of the privileged, financially secure polyamorous professionals I spoke with stay closeted at work because they understandably fear discrimination, ranging from being passed over for promotion and excluded from important projects to flat-out being fired. This means hiding their families and themselves from the people they work alongside every day. Diana has even had a personal encounter with workplace discrimination, on top of the threats and invasive questions about their sexuality that they receive on a regular basis. Years ago, as they recounted, The Village Voice published a photo of Diana kissing a former girlfriend in front of a polyamory banner at the NYC Pride March; soon after, Diana’s girlfriend was called into her finance company’s human resources department and told she would be terminated if she ever did anything like that again.

The situation is the most dire for those who have additional barriers to equitable treatment, such as being low-income and BIPOC or transgender, which describes almost all of the clients whom Chosen Family Law Center helps. The stereotype that most polyamorous people are white and wealthy is unequivocally false. If it seems that way, it’s probably because poly people without those privileges aren’t as comfortable going public with their relationships due to the added risk involved. Regardless of demographic factors, when anyone reaches out to Diana because they’ve been fired due to being poly, there is still very little that can be done to help them. The Polyamory Legal Advocacy Coalition (PLAC), a project supported by Chosen Family Law Center and the Harvard Law School LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic, is working hard to change that. Just last month, PLAC helped pass the nation’s first relationship-structure nondiscrimination law in Somerville, Massachusetts. This historic and groundbreaking accomplishment marks the first time that Diana finally has legal authority to fight back when they get phone calls about people losing work, being denied housing, or facing some other kind of discrimination.

I know what you’re thinking, but we can’t all move to Somerville. The parking is already atrocious, and how will I justify the bitter winters to my sun-loving, short-haired terrier? Thankfully, PLAC intends to use its recent victory as a springboard to pass similar laws everywhere. It will follow in the footsteps of the same-sex marriage movement by implementing inclusive policies, first in blue bubble areas, and then expanding city by city. In a time of so much uncertainty and angst, these places will function as lighthouses to alert those who are currently being treated as second-class citizens that safe havens do indeed exist, and that a cultural shift is on the horizon.

It may be difficult to truly empathize with this civil rights battle without understanding the shortcomings of the oft-heard argument that polyamory is just for the greedy and selfish. Idealistically, nonmonogamy is actually built around the very concept of sharing. Yes, polyamory involves seeking love and connection from more people, but not just for oneself; rather, for one’s partner(s) as well. Many poly people describe experiencing palpable joy when their loved ones receive pleasure from someone else, a phenomenon called “compersion.” Sarafina Starling, whose physical disability prevents her from participating in strenuous activities like hiking, is constantly encouraging her nesting partner to find other partners to take on outdoorsy dates. Her love for him is so pure that she wants him to experience as rich a life as possible, even if it means some of his most special moments won’t include her. And it’s a two-way street. She explained: “On the flip side, he encourages me to pursue the rest of my sexuality, and seek out partners that have different gender expressions, to fulfill my bisexuality that he can’t as a cis male.” While bisexual people can, of course, feel fully satisfied in monogamous relationships, for Sarafina and her partner, the generous flexibility they’ve built into their relationship helps them show up authentically and without resentment—and even commit more deeply to each other—because they don’t feel pressure to contort themselves into something they’re not.

One reason many people fear nonmonogamy so intensely is that they cannot fathom handling the pain and jealousy that would arise if their lover were to be intimate with another person. From what I’ve seen, it’s not that poly people never feel these challenging emotions, but rather that they actively grow their tolerance for discomfort in pursuit of more love for everyone. Because nonmonogamous people don’t offer each other security in the form of complete exclusivity, they need to work double time to build secure bonds via other means, such as diving deep into the specific attachment needs of their partners and providing each other openhearted reassurance whenever necessary. So when naysayers suggest that polyamorous people are all just afraid of commitment, I can’t help but laugh as I think about the insane amount of effort that’s required to simultaneously nurture multiple loving connections. As one of my sources quipped, “You basically need a PhD in feelings to be successfully polyamorous.” She elaborated: “I want people to know how much you can get out of it and how much better it makes my world to be able to think of relationships this way. But on the other hand, I also really, really need people to know how much goddamn work it is. It’s the three-dimensional chess of relationships and human interactions.”

Beyond just attending to multiple partners’ needs, poly people must also contend with deprogramming their own deeply ingrained conditioning. Whether from rom-coms or our own parents, most of what we’ve been taught about love has been filtered through a monogamous lens, so rewriting that script can be arduous, even for unwavering, lifelong polyamorists. The commitment I’ve observed within the polyamorous community to following one’s inner compass and loving without limits has forever changed me. And if poly people were free to live more openly, I believe that their paradigm-busting ways could help inspire others to break free from all kinds of unhealthy and dysfunctional patterns, romantic and otherwise.

Think about the number of people who subconsciously seek tumultuous and painful relationships because they’ve seen them portrayed that way in films and television, or worse, in their childhood homes. The message that we can forge our own path rather than mindlessly imitate what feels familiar is a direct answer to that. So yes, poly people deserve the same rights as monogamous folks. But the real plot twist here is that cultivating more acceptance of nonmonogamy will benefit everyone, not just those who practice it. Societies function better when citizens can be their authentic selves, and we can’t expect to learn anything from each other without first being able to see each other. Successful polyamorous relationships are living proof that love doesn’t have to fit within a predetermined structure, but instead can take any shape our imagination can dream up. And the simple yet powerful idea that we don’t have to do things the way they’ve been done before has the potential to spur meaningful change in a world that so desperately needs it.