# Relationship Philosophies

In the context of these [Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Overview), relationship philosophies articulate the approaches a person takes to one or more aspects of connecting with other people.

There are a wide range of approaches to relationships. Even within contexts that reject the default approaches, this range is often reduced to questions of exclusivity in one of the many [forms of intimacy](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Intimacy) that contributes to the [expectation agreements](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Expectations) that [structure the dynamics](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/StructuralDynamics) of relationships (for example, [monogamy vs. non-monogamy](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-polyamorists-next-door/201407/7-different-kinds-non-monogamy)). This contributes to [escalator](https://offescalator.com/what-escalator/) narratives and [amatonormativity](https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/04/amatonormativity-expectations/) and obscures the incredible variability in the ways in which people can and do form relationships.

To illustrate this wider range of possibilities, the following is a small selection of specific terms that each function as [descriptive tools](https://medium.com/@othevastness/labels-are-descriptive-not-prescriptive-6e0ad4396952) for a shared understanding about particular aspects of forming relationships - some of which mutually-exclusive, while others overlap.

Rather than providing an instruction manual, these relationship philosophies a listed as examples of the many more that exist. I don't subscribe to any specific relationship philosophy, I tend to view each as offering tools that can help articulate the shifting descriptions of how we each approach various aspects of the various relationship dynamics to which we contribute. That said, some relationship philosophies align with my approach to intentional relationships more than others and, for these, I have included additional detail of how I use these terms. My biases and editorialising are intended to be transparent, if not explicit, and I've tried to include links to alternative views where possible.

## The Default Approach to Relationships
I use this term to describe an approach to relationships of choosing the default option of collecting the limited set of relationships options without questioning the carries entrenched expectations that some of these pre-packaged combinations of relationship elements are more valued within the broader society than others - [see more](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/DefaultView)

## An Intentional Approach to All Relationships
Approaches that cultivate dynamics based on mutually-agreed relationship-elements. In this context, relationship types tend to be descriptive rather than prescriptive and engage with the dynamics that relationships emerge within, and contribute to, of the intersecting structures within our broader contexts - [see more](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Intro)

Taking an intentional approach to relating can provide an avenue for expressing how each relationship has a unique combination of [elements](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/ElementsOverview) that need not pre-determine its value. There are many variations on intentional relating, and each overlap with other relationship philosophies.

## Friendships are Relationships
The default tendency is to assume that our friendships are somehow less important to maintain than whichever primary 'Relationship' - i.e. romantic/sexual connection - we've currently sustaining (or seeking).

Rejecting this default narrative, there have been several approaches to rehabilitating the practice of cultivating friendships as relationships. This includes taking an intentional approach to platonic friendships - an approach that often forms a key component of intentional approaches to relationships more generally (for example, see these notes from the [intentional friendship salon](https://embassynetwork.com/locations/konsulat/events/858/friendships-as-intentional-relationships/) hosted by the Embassy Network).

In addition, intentional platonic friendships are also worth explicitly cultivating alongside whichever approach is taken to intimate relationships or relationships more generally. For example, within communities who've long cultivated queer kinship structures, there is a often an explicit recognition of [queer platonic relationships](https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/04/18/what-is-a-quasiplatonic-aka-queerplatonic-relationship-friendship/) and [quasi platonic partnerships](https://aromantic.lgbt/Attraction_terms).

In addition to cultivating intentional practices within platonic relationships, these approaches also converge with approaches that recognise that [friendships](/@Teq/BJ7s51kCI) can incorporate any forms of intimacy and require the same dedicated and careful communication typically reserved for romantic lovers

Additional perspectives on the practice of being intentional about friendships include:
- [*Friendship: possibly the most important type of intimate relationship* blog post by Aggie Sez, 2017 2018](https://offescalator.com/friendship-possibly-the-most-important-type-of-intimate-relationship/)
- [*The Friendship Cure* book by Kate Leaver, 2018](https://www.booktopia.com.au/the-friendship-cure-kate-leaver/book/9781460754542.html)
- [*Friendships are work and its worth it* by Vanessa in Autostraddle 2019](https://www.autostraddle.com/friendships-are-work-and-its-worth-it-loving-your-friends-like-you-love-your-dates/)


## Queer Kinship
A form of kinship often described as ‘logical/chosen families’ that ‘grow at the rate of trust’. Rarely recognised within the relevant socio-legal context, these relationships explicitly celebrate that the bonds between those people who we choose to develop commitments can be as binding as the assumed ties between legally-bounds people and biologically-determined relations (if not more so). Rather than legal or inherited frameworks, queer kinship connections are created with an intentionality that helps provide a form of resilience to the stigma faced within broader society for being queer. For example, the connections formed within queer kinship structures often include high degrees of intimacy between multiple individuals within the network with each contributing to an informal network of mutual aid that extends mutual support beyond each of the one-to-one relationships within it.

Additional perspectives on experiences of queer kinship include:
- [Queer Time and Space: Family Structures and Kinship, article by Maddi Fowler c.2013](https://complicatingqueertheory.wordpress.com/queer-families/queer-time-and-space-family-structures-and-kinship/)
- [*Queer kinship could heal the world* article by Drew Heckman in the LGBTQ Policy Journal - a Harvard Kennedy School Student Publication, 2019](https://lgbtq.hkspublications.org/2019/05/22/queer-kinship-could-heal-the-world/)
- [The *Queer Kinship Project* of the the Chosen Family Law Center, ongoing](https://chosenfamilylawcenter.org/queer-kinship)
- Donna Haraway has written extensively about the concept of kinship and the importance of extending kinship beyond the human-human interactions within biological and nuclear family units. For an introduction see this interview: [Making Kin, 2019](https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/making-kin-an-interview-with-donna-haraway)
> "By kin I mean those who have an enduring mutual, obligatory, non-optional, you-can’t-just-cast-that-away-when-it-gets-inconvenient, enduring relatedness that carries consequences.... I think LGBTQI people from all sections of society, as well as many Indigenous Peoples and African-American communities, have been the most innovative in the United States in terms of building and sustaining really interesting kinds of kin networks, often against great odds. There are lots of very practical issues, including housing and financial issues, and I’m interested in questions of inheritance and adoption law — various ways that people can build financial obligation into each other’s friendship networks."

## Relationship Anarchy
Relationship anarchy (RA) is an approach characterised by the process of interrogating default expectation about how we structure our various relationships with an appreciation that the [personal is political](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_personal_is_political) includes the dynamics of each or our relationships.
> "Every choice individualistically made also, for better or worse, affects others. (And every choice however individually experienced has in some respect been influenced). That is society and culture. That is humanity. We are connected. The personal is political" [hjkl, 2016](https://hjklwrites.wordpress.com/2016/01/19/the-personal-is-political/).

While practiced in a range of inconsistent ways, RA philosophies tend to include:
- Respect for our respective areas of [autonomy](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-autonomy/#RelAut) within the broader *interdependent* systems we are all part of
- Interrogating the defaults that are provided by the heteronormative model, as well as it’s off-shoot homonormative expectations, including [amatonormativity expecatations](https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/04/amatonormativity-expectations/), [couple privilege](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/CouplePrivilege), [entrenched racism](https://www.instagram.com/p/CJ3799FhnZm/?igshid=1259ipbapaic9), and the other expectations of inequality that provides the foundations for capitalism.
- Engaging in any given relationship by collaboratively determining how that dynamic will be shaped (including exclusivity agreements, if any) - often by explicitly discussing the unique collection of elements included in each relationship - a process some describe as analogous to agreeing on which ['smörgåsbord'](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sm%C3%B6rg%C3%A5sbord) options are agreeable for those sharing a given plate of food without presuming that is the only plate either is eating from - e.g., see [Maxx Hill's relationship-smörgåsbord version-5](https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10205963246316687&set=a.1011109094424&type=3&theater&refid=18) and an [earlier version](https://docs.google.com/document/d/19MtGH0BR7wlSMBtnh1m2xh1f4fQi1HHn7jkgwAk9WJ8).
- Allowing each new interaction to develop in its own way without any preconceived notions about what which relationship-elements will be shared, and approaching to ALL relationships as having the potential for this customisable dynamic (as much as possible within the broader sociopolitical dynamics we function within)
- Using descriptive labels for different types of relationships rather than prescriptive ones.
- Engagement with anarchist political philosophies more generally

Additional perspectives on experiences of relationship anarchy include:

- Andie Nordgren's [manifesto for relationship anarchy](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/andie-nordgren-the-short-instructional-manifesto-for-relationship-anarchy), 2014
> "Life would not have much structure or meaning without joining together with other people to achieve things ... it’s about designing your own commitments with the people around you, and freeing them from norms dictating that certain types of commitments are a requirement for love to be real, or that some commitments like raising children or moving in together have to be driven by certain kinds of feelings. Start from scratch and be explicit about what kind of commitments you want to make with other people!"
- Zarinah Agnew's [beginners guide to 'what is relationship anarchy?'](https://medium.com/@like_antennas_to_heaven/relationship-anarchy-what-is-it-3f8a6524448), 2018.
>"Relationship anarchy is not about never committing to anything — it’s about designing your own commitments with the people around you, and freeing them from norms dictating that certain types of commitments are a requirement for love to be real"
- Claire Meyer's take on [RA as a feminist-twist on relationships'](https://psuvanguard.com/relationship-anarchy-a-feminist-twist-on-relationships/), 2018.
> "RA practice emphasizes openness, communication, respect, cooperation and consent, and the principles of relationship anarchy can be practiced by everyone, even monogamous individuals".
- Zoe Belinsky's [2018](https://medium.com/@malkekvmachashayfele/not-relationship-anarchism-but-relationship-communism-a27b89884fa8) argument for 'relationship communism' that highlights ways in which the practice of relationship anarchy can be too individualistic.
>"the notion that each relationship is unique and needs to be given individual determination fails to note the ways in which broader political and communitarian relationships come to bear on each individual partnership or friendship. RA relationships determine themselves from the ‘inside’ out, by focusing on the autonomy and uniqueness of each relationship taken as a given. As communists, we recognize that interpersonal relationships already reflect the relations of the community (whatever you want to call it), and as such are constrained and determined from the ‘outside’ before they can even exist. Relationships are not atomic ethical units, and not all concerns reduce to singular relationships."
- Tiro's [2020](https://kalasutra.wordpress.com/2020/02/10/relationship-libertarianism/) response to Belinky that discusses the confusion that can occur when people describe themselves as relationship anarchists yet ignore key components of anarchism to instead practice something that would be described as relationship libertarianism.
> "We can rescue RA from these selfish individualists by looking more closely at social anarchism. Understanding relationship social anarchism as distinct from relationship libertarian anarchism ... will allow us to keep the central insights of RA."
- Zine contribution on [Infinite Relationships](https://www.filmsforaction.org/lawrence/news/infinite-relationships-relationships-without-bounds-or-boundaries-love-without-limits/) describing a personal experience of adopting relationship anarchy approaches.
> "To set borders on what another person can do or feel, as a condition for them to be able to receive my love and affection, goes against everything I believe as an anarchist and a human being; I want to trust others to know what they need, and never limit them—and I certainly don’t think my life will be any richer from the limitations I place on others."
- An explanation of the view that [relationship anarchy is not post-polyamory](https://unquietpirate.wordpress.com/2015/11/03/relationship-anarchy-is-not-post-polyamory/) on the Emotional Mutation blog (2015)
> "Relationship anarchy has been around for a long, long time, so I don’t think it makes sense to categorize it as “post” anything. It is not just a different way of doing intimacy; it’s an integration of your relationship politics with your politics regarding the police, the government, and other oppressive systems. I do think that inclusive, fluid, open, intersectional, complex, loving community networks are lovely and I’m so excited to see more of them. They can exist, in part, because relationship anarchists of the past blew some shit up. (Conceptually and interpersonally, as it were.) But I don’t think they’re inherently political. Anarchism must be."
- The [*List of Relationship Anarchy Articles, Links, Resources*](https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/0BzSNm9VTs5ylZGN6VENVTmlZQzA) prepared as part of the [RAD](www.radunconference.com) unconference.

## Consensual / Ethical Non-Monogamy
While these approaches can overlap with intentional approaches to relationships more generally, the focus is on relationships that include sexual and/or romantic connections that are consensually non-exclusive (i.e., with the full knowledge of non-exclusivitiy by all the parties involved) and ethical (i.e., practiced in ways that align with broader ethical values).

Ethical non-monogamy and consensual non-monogamy are often used interchangeably and sometimes as an umbrella term to cover a range of distinct approaches that include ethically practiced consensual sexual non-exclusivity - including some forms of polyamory, swinging, monogamish arrangements, etc. - where the key characteristic is honesty (as this distinguishes these practices from well-known *unethical* non-monogamous practices such as cheating).

For some examples of the wide range of approaches clustered under this umbrella, see [Episode 96 of Running Wild with Christine](https://anchor.fm/runningwildwithchristine/episodes/Ep-96-Alternatives-to-Monogamy--Tales-of-Pleasure--with-Devon-ectpfn/a-a23vlic).

## Polyamory
Loving multiple people simultaneously, with the knowledge and consent of all that each relationships may include intimate romantic/sexual dynamics. There are many variations of this and, while some polyamorous practices align under the ethical/consensual non-monogamy umbrella, this can't be assumed. Some of the variations include egalitarian network polyamory, kitchen-table polyamory, parallel polyamory, hierarchical polyamory, etc.,

Additional perspectives on experiences of polyamory include:
- [Anne Hunter, on *The joy of polyamory* in Archer Magazine, 2014](http://archermagazine.com.au/2014/10/the-joy-of-polyamory/)
- J Koyanagi's videos, including an [overview of four of the different approaches to polyamory](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woh5tm61DHo) and some terms used within polyamory communities [part 1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3dbIqm4P8Y) & [part 2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG61n3bpFqo), 2018
- [Alicia Bunyan-Sampson](http://aliciabunyansampson.com/) at the [Polyamorousblackgirl blog](https://polyamorousblackgirl.com/) - inclduing, an article on how [polyamory is a privilage](https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/11/diary-of-a-polyamorous-black-girl/) (2016)
- Michelle at [polyamouswhileasian](https://msha.ke/polyamorouswhileasian/#about) who has an active instagram with gems like this cute [recipe for successful polyamory](https://www.instagram.com/p/CDzBT20pCJj/)
- Jokko's [botanist analogy](https://www.instagram.com/p/B8J0fZIpzx6/?igshid=1plbtnm4tw3ps), and other illustrated reflections on practicing polyamory


## Solo-polyamory
While there is variation within the community that has emerged around this term, some key characteristics of this approach include:
- functioning in the world as a unit-of-one (by choice or circumstance).
- actively maintaining the autonomy to commit to multiple intimate relationships, none of which limit the autonomy of a person to choose the [relationship elements](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/ElementsOverview) they have available when co-creating relationships with other people.
- cultivating interdependence while avoiding enmeshment or exclusive dependence on any one other person. For example maintaining separate finances to partners, living alone or alone-with-others, and maintaining the sole-responsibility for all major life-decisions while consulting with others when a given decision impacts them or they have relevant knowledge to provide advice.

Sometimes this approach is part of an intentional practice by those who identify as both *solo* and *polyamorous* - sometimes alongside a more general relationship philosophy (e.g., alongside an explicit relationship-anarchy approach or within an apolitical approach to ethical non-monogamy for example). Other times, solo-polyamory provides a valuable identity for finding communities that support those who've found themselves solo-by-circumstance while navigating polyamorous communities.

Additional perspectives on experiences of solopolyamory include:

- Aggie Sez 2014 [What is solo-polyamory?](https://solopoly.net/2014/12/05/what-is-solo-polyamory-my-take/)
- Codi Coday 2016 [Is Solo-Poly Ableist?](https://polypretzels.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/is-solo-polyamory-ableist/)

## Ambiamory
In the context of this resource, ambiamory refers to an approach where the individual is open to the [structural dynamics of a relationship](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/StructuralDynamics) being exclusive *or* non-exclusive in terms of specific [forms of intimacy](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Intimacy) depending on the situation within which the relationship emerges.

Additional perspectives on experiences of ambiamory include:
- [Kathleen Lloyd's description of ambiamory](https://medium.com/polyamory-today/im-polyamorous-or-am-i-8516c00681e3)
- [Some ambiamorous challenges](https://poly.land/2018/07/10/the-reasons-why-5-ambiamorous-people-chose-functional-monogamy/)

## Monogomish
In the context of this resource, monogomish refers to an approach to relationships characterised by a desire for some form of *exclusive* [structural dynamics](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/StructuralDynamics) that also allows for constrained practices of *ethical non-monogamy*. For example, some [couples](/@IntentionalRelationshipsToolkit/ryW8MDnp8) agree to exclusivity in terms of [emotional intimacy, but not erotic intimacy and/or kink intimacies, or vice versa](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Intimacy).

Additional perspectives on experiences of monogomish approaches include:
- [mongogamish blog](https://monogamish.blog/)
- Andrea Syrtash's Glamour article on being [monogamish](https://www.glamour.com/story/what-is-monogamish), 2016
- Reece & Jodie's tips for [concious relationships](https://www.practicalintimacy.com/conscious-relationships-ultimate-guide/) at Practical Intimacy.

## Non-Toxic Monogamy
In this context, non-toxic monogamy refers to approaches that seek to [rehabilitate monogamy](https://poly.land/2020/02/14/why-non-toxic-monogamy-is-a-beautiful-thing-why-yes-no-no-yes/) by practicing it in ways that dismantle the [toxic elements of default-monogamy](https://poly.land/2016/10/31/toxic-monogamy-mono-poly-hard/). For example, some relationship anarchists spend time in relationships structured by an exclusive sexual agreement while working to avoid the default narrative of which other relationship components to combine with this sexual connection, or into the habit of prioritising the sexually-exclusive relationship over non-sexual relationships.

## 'Theories of Love'
There are many different [theories of love](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_love) that have been developed to describe and/or why we form different relationships with different people. Many of these outline various taxonomies of describing elements of attraction, passion, intimacy, companionship, etc.,. However, most reinforce the [default relationship](/@IntentionalRelationshipsToolkit/B1Y5pHsaU) expectation that there is a hierarchy of relationship types with the goal being to find person who is can provide more sub-components within the taxonomy than any other.
Examples include:
- Robert Sternberg's ['Trianglular Theory of Love'](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_love#Forms_of_love) (1997), which describes three components of love - passion, intimacy, and commitment - and argues that six different forms of love are made up of specific combinations of these, with 'consumate love' occuring when all three components align and non-love being the absence of all three. It's had mixed reviews within the relevant scientific communities.

- John Alan Lee's [Colour Wheel Theory of Love](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_wheel_theory_of_love) (1973), which describes various 'primary' and 'secondary' types of love - with those considered primary associated with romantic/sex relationships.

## Next Steps
- Return to the [Overview of Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/Overview)
- Return to the [List of Contents](https://hackmd.io/@IntentionalRelationships/ContentsPage) for Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships

## Attribution & Contact
See [attribution notes and contact details](/hiL09et4RMebuQWFyTN7uQ)
<a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="https://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-sa/4.0/88x31.png" /></a> [CC BY-NC-SA](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)