Given the way you wrote this, it sounds like you’re using the word “polycule” to mean something like “a group of people who are all dating all of each other.” I’ve recently heard a few people use the word “polycule” as if this is the definition.
But, uh, I’ve been polyamorous for 8 years, and I’ve literally never heard of this happening. The closest thing I’ve seen is a triad, in which a group of three people are all dating each other, but that’s quite rare and often isn’t very stable. (Newly-nonmonogamous married couples sometimes explicitly seek out a bisexual woman to date both of them, but this almost never works out. This behavior is referred to as “unicorn hunting,” and it’s generally frowned upon within the polyamorous community.)
”Polycule” refers to a network of one-on-one polyamorous relationships. (It’s a play on “molecule”—when you draw these graphs, they look kind of like molecules.)
For example: Alice is married to Bob; Bob is dating Carol; Carol is dating David; David is dating Edward; Carol is married to Francis. In that example, Alice *might* have a relationship with Carol, depending on how close she likes to be with her partners’ partners, and depending on how serious the relationship between Bob and Carol is. But she likely has zero relationship with David, Edward, or Francis.
A “polycule” is more of a fun little diagram, and less of an actual social entity. When my “polycule” technically splits in half because I break up with a partner, there are often no substantial consequences to my life besides the change in my relationship with that one person. “Joining a polycule” just means starting to date an individual person who happens to be dating other people—it doesn’t somehow give you political power by being connected to everyone else in the polycule.
In many cases, the monogamous equivalent of “someone in my polycule is joining my team at work” would be something like “my wife’s friend’s tennis partner is joining my team at work.” (Especially because many polyamorous relationships are pretty casual.)
I do think the effect spreading through the network is more intense/disruptive in a polykule vs in laws, but that does not necessarily determine whether the effect will work against the complaining employee. E.g. if my fictional metamour were to start a massive dramatic crisis with an employee, and put pressure on my partner to back them in it, and this left my partner confused and distressed while around me, I can very much imagine myself not backing the metamour, but recommending that my partner draws a boundary so they do not melt down in my living room, and that we both withdraw as entangled and recommend a neutral person to evaluate.
Given the way you wrote this, it sounds like you’re using the word “polycule” to mean something like “a group of people who are all dating all of each other.” I’ve recently heard a few people use the word “polycule” as if this is the definition.
But, uh, I’ve been polyamorous for 8 years, and I’ve literally never heard of this happening. The closest thing I’ve seen is a triad, in which a group of three people are all dating each other, but that’s quite rare and often isn’t very stable. (Newly-nonmonogamous married couples sometimes explicitly seek out a bisexual woman to date both of them, but this almost never works out. This behavior is referred to as “unicorn hunting,” and it’s generally frowned upon within the polyamorous community.)
”Polycule” refers to a network of one-on-one polyamorous relationships. (It’s a play on “molecule”—when you draw these graphs, they look kind of like molecules.)
For example: Alice is married to Bob; Bob is dating Carol; Carol is dating David; David is dating Edward; Carol is married to Francis. In that example, Alice *might* have a relationship with Carol, depending on how close she likes to be with her partners’ partners, and depending on how serious the relationship between Bob and Carol is. But she likely has zero relationship with David, Edward, or Francis.
A “polycule” is more of a fun little diagram, and less of an actual social entity. When my “polycule” technically splits in half because I break up with a partner, there are often no substantial consequences to my life besides the change in my relationship with that one person. “Joining a polycule” just means starting to date an individual person who happens to be dating other people—it doesn’t somehow give you political power by being connected to everyone else in the polycule.
In many cases, the monogamous equivalent of “someone in my polycule is joining my team at work” would be something like “my wife’s friend’s tennis partner is joining my team at work.” (Especially because many polyamorous relationships are pretty casual.)
My experience is that it is like having extra in laws, who you may or may not like, but have to sort of get along with occasionally.
I don’t think most people actually talk very much with their in laws, or assume that people who the in law dislikes should be disliked.
I do think the effect spreading through the network is more intense/disruptive in a polykule vs in laws, but that does not necessarily determine whether the effect will work against the complaining employee. E.g. if my fictional metamour were to start a massive dramatic crisis with an employee, and put pressure on my partner to back them in it, and this left my partner confused and distressed while around me, I can very much imagine myself not backing the metamour, but recommending that my partner draws a boundary so they do not melt down in my living room, and that we both withdraw as entangled and recommend a neutral person to evaluate.