City of Seattle Consider Protecting Polyamorous People With Anti-Discrimination Law

The Seattle City Council will vote next Tuesday on legislation to expand the City’s existing civil rights protections to include people in consensually non-monogamous relationships. 

Some may roll their eyes or make a clumsy joke comparing the whole ordeal to a Portlandia sketch (yes, Portland already has an ordinance protecting poly people), but the personal testimonies from non-mongamous Seattlites gave greater understanding of how this simple addition will deliver massive relief for many non-traditional families who fear discrimination. 

The legislation, sponsored by Council Member Alexis Mercedes Rinck, updates the definition of “sexual orientation” in the list of Seattle’s protected classes. The edit strikes “male or female” as a qualifier to heterosexuality and adds pansexuality and asexuality. Bisexuality and homosexuality are already explicitly named in this definition. 

The existing definition goes on to state “sexual orientation” also “includes a person’s attitudes, preferences, beliefs, and practices pertaining thereto.” Rinck’s legislation clarifies that “attitudes, preferences, beliefs, and practices” includes actual or perceived non-monogamy. 

Including non-mongamous people in definition will make it illegal to discriminate against someone for their relationship structure when it comes to employment, housing, policing, and other areas enforced by Seattle Office for Civil Right. This does not mean that employers have to provide the same perks they would to an employee's spouse to multiple partners as explicitly stated in the text of the law. 

When you hear the policy like that — a few words crossed out, some clarifying language buried in municipal code — it really doesn’t sound like much. But for the poly people who showed up to City Hall on Wednesday, the legislation meant peace of mind. 

Tyson Holman, chair of the Seattle Coalition for Family and Relationship Equity, has been part of the poly community for a long time, according to his public comment Wednesday. 

“I’ve witnessed a lot of pain about being out, right? And inability to be out,” Holman said. “A lot of people in my life, including myself, have had to pretend to not love the person that they love, because being out risks discrimination. And I've held people in my arms crying when they have to be reduced to just a friend, when really they're a partner. And this is something I see all the time. And I truly believe that, by far, this is one of the most painful things about being a polyamorous person.”

Holman continued,  “And I think that's why these protections are so important, right? We don't have to worry about losing our homes or our jobs or families. I think it's a step in the right direction.”

Richard Gilmore, a 73 year-old man about to celebrate 26 years in a “polyamours quad” spoke to a similar fear. 

“...what I've experienced throughout my life while I was working was having to be very careful about who I spoke to about my personal life,” Gilmore said. “When you get together and people are saying, ‘Hey, what did you do this weekend?’ Or, you know, ‘Where did you go?’ People are talking about things, and I had to be very circumspect with how I answered those kinds of questions.”

The common fear is, if someone is discovered to be in these poly dynamics, employers, landlords, other people with power over their wellbeing may treat them differently than their peers in more common relationship structures. Polyamory is highly stigmatized and is even the butt of the joke among people who would otherwise consider themselves open-minded. 

One public testimony, from Cassandra Schwartz, perhaps most eloquently combatted the negative stigma surrounding polyamory. 

"I am a divorced parent. I share a son with my ex, and we've worked really hard to build a family that shows up for each other. When my son's stepmom was in the hospital, I took care of her son along with mine for a few days, and most people don't find that particularly difficult to understand. We're divorced. We are co-parents, and our families are connected. When someone needs help, we help.

But my family extends further than that. When my girlfriend had a hysterectomy, her husband and I took turns taking care of her. When I broke my ankle and all of my partners happened to be out of town, it was my nesting partner's girlfriend who took me to the ER and walked the dogs.

And I realized that somewhere, the nesting partner's girlfriend may have lost the plot for you, but that's okay. Sometimes my family does require a flow chart to follow, but it doesn't require that when someone needs help, because we know who shows up. We know who takes care of the kids, who sits with someone after surgery, who drives you to the emergency room, and who walks the dogs.

That's what my polyamorous family looks like. It's not simply about having multiple romantic relationships. It's an interconnected network of people who love each other, care for each other, and take responsibility for one another.

That is our village. And frankly, it's the village we need to survive in this world. I'm standing here openly talking about my family, but I don't always feel comfortable doing that. There are places where I have to think carefully about which parts of my family I talk about and which relationships I name.

Being open about being polyamorous doesn't always feel safe when I know that someone else's judgment about my family could affect my livelihood. And that's part of why this matters.

Recognition isn't just symbolic. When life goes sideways, these are the people who show up. I want to live in a city that protects families that actually exist, not only families that are easy to explain."

The comittee passed the legislation unanimously. It will see a vote by the full council next Tuesday.