Overall, I wish there would have been less focus on trying to portray polyamory negatively—both in the article and in all the discussions about the article on the forum. Both because it was unnecessary and unhealthy to pass judgemental of people’s personal dating preferences and because it has detracted from the conversations about sexual harassment/assault. IMO, the behavior described in the article can be considered unacceptable irrespective of people personal views about mono/poly.
The first few comments on this post are also understandably hung up on the mention of being invited to a ‘polycule’ and the sex party involving ‘BDSM’ sex toys. But these comments (very possibly unintentionally) end up dismissing an alternate and important interpretation of these incident—If you substitute polycule with “mono relationship” and “BDSM sex toys” with “sex toys”, the incidents sound just as horrifying. I do not think you need to be anti-poly or anti-kink to think that a workplace culture that makes it acceptable to make sexual advances to your colleagues (both inside and outside of the workplace because bumping into your boss at the gym does not change the power dynamics of your relationship) is likely to lead to sexual harassment and discrimination issues.
I do not agree with a general statement about reducing “weirdness” in the community as this can be misused to discriminate against certain groups. (As long as “being accepting of bad behavior” or “having less strict policies on workplace romance and /or sexual harassment than is usual practice in non EA orgs” is not passed of as a weird quirk we should get used to).
I agree that the high intersection between romance and office/network likely leads to unhealthy professional spaces.
There should be guidelines about dating in the workplace at EA orgs. There should be regular sexual harassment prevention trainings at EA orgs, and they should be highly recommended for people engaging in EA projects together outside of the orgs, for people working as grant makers, etc. I would consider expanding mini trainings to EA Global or any other EA professional spaces.
Overall, I wish there would have been less focus on trying to portray polyamory negatively—both in the article and in all the discussions about the article on the forum. Both because it was unnecessary and unhealthy to pass judgemental of people’s personal dating preferences and because it has detracted from the conversations about sexual harassment/assault. IMO, the behavior described in the article can be considered unacceptable irrespective of people personal views about mono/poly.
The first few comments on this post are also understandably hung up on the mention of being invited to a ‘polycule’ and the sex party involving ‘BDSM’ sex toys. But these comments (very possibly unintentionally) end up dismissing an alternate and important interpretation of these incident—If you substitute polycule with “mono relationship” and “BDSM sex toys” with “sex toys”, the incidents sound just as horrifying. I do not think you need to be anti-poly or anti-kink to think that a workplace culture that makes it acceptable to make sexual advances to your colleagues (both inside and outside of the workplace because bumping into your boss at the gym does not change the power dynamics of your relationship) is likely to lead to sexual harassment and discrimination issues.
I do not agree with a general statement about reducing “weirdness” in the community as this can be misused to discriminate against certain groups. (As long as “being accepting of bad behavior” or “having less strict policies on workplace romance and /or sexual harassment than is usual practice in non EA orgs” is not passed of as a weird quirk we should get used to).
I agree that the high intersection between romance and office/network likely leads to unhealthy professional spaces.
There should be guidelines about dating in the workplace at EA orgs. There should be regular sexual harassment prevention trainings at EA orgs, and they should be highly recommended for people engaging in EA projects together outside of the orgs, for people working as grant makers, etc. I would consider expanding mini trainings to EA Global or any other EA professional spaces.