The only other term I can I can think of that might cover all the things that "work with" does is "involved with". Except "involved with" almost always has overtones of sexual or romantic involvement when it's used of an individual rather than something abstract, like an art movement or charitable organisation. That would really make 'em squirm.
#sometimes the solution is the problem
... Honestly though that’s rather good from my POV. The overtones you mention are appropriate as regards a vague but large percentage of my devotional life, so if that’s the note the phrase “involved with” strikes, at least it's a note more or less in tune. “Work with” isn’t wrong either, but it nets out at somewhat less right than “involved with.” I’ve used “entangled with” before but it’s a bit on the spluttery side -- “involved with" is less defensive and thus has greater utility. I like. (memo to self: don’t forget all about this in two minutes, now, it’s good)
I’ve never found a word or phrase that feels right and complete for this, even just privately. But one must say something. There’s a nonzero chance haters gonna pop up with hate, whatever lexicon one happens to draw upon, so, might as well be hanged for a pound as a penny -- I mean, if I do pull a bad lotto ticket on a given day and get shat on, I’d rather it be over something I actually am or do: I'm old and tough and resilient and it’s more energizing and amusing and also has a better chance of being productive for me than being drawn into irritable defense of some semi-arbitrary position. (Like, “work with" -- that’s a phrase I’ll stand up for as valid, and as possessing real utility, if I see the need, I’m just, kinda, not that invested.)
@runecestershire, not content, added in a follow-up ask:
And then there's always "in cahoots with" :)
Well. Yeah. Especially if you’re talking about Odin, since He’s always in cahoots with whoever, not not including me. But, it works across the board. It'll still piss people off (irreverent diction + liable to be heard as egalitarian = double-whammy honeypot for that end of the critical spectrum) but what won’t..
