Integration is one of the strong arguments for enabling individuals to manage work/non-work relationships. Beside its noble intentions, integration may not solve individuals work/non-work conflict. Work-family scholars conclude that work-life programmes are seen as ”employer friendly” because they are good for business and the organisation’s ethical and social image rather than ”employee friendly”. In fact, work-life programmes that shall support all individuals to manage their work/non-work relationships often focus on certain individuals and share a unique view of work/non-work management. Recognizing the richness of the current knowledge in the work-life research, it becomes legitimate to discuss its relevancy for every individual. In that regards, it is observable that most of the research in the work-life field is based on a knowledge accumulated for heterosexual individuals in couple with children that represent the “accepted lifestyle” in most societies. Diversity in terms of alternative lifestyles among those single by choice, no children by choice, bohemian lifestyle as well as gay-lesbian-bi-trans lifestyle (LGBT) are largely less represented. I argue that practitioners but also researchers shall pay attention to every individual including ”alternative lifestyles”. This paper aims at problematizing and hypothesising work/non-work experiences in the context of alternative lifestyles from a boundary management perspective. This paper is foremost theoretical with illustrations from gay alternative lifestyle. Based on the view that boundary management is seen as a multi-level contextual process, this paper shows that when the “so call alternative lifestyle” is accepted at a given level, the work/non-work decisions/experiences are similar to the ones from an “accepted lifestyle” but when the “alternative lifestyle” is not accepted the work/non-work decisions become individuals’ burden so that one must develop his/her own work/non-work strategy. The multi- level contextual creates tensions for “alternative lifestyles” people and may lead to negative outcomes in their overall work/non-work experiences.