The act of working together can include any coordinated purposeful activity that contributes to a specific output/goal, such as 'making something together'. However, the ways we relate with the people with whom we work are often positioned as distinct from the forms of relationships outside of our professional contexts. This may be because of the close association of work with the activities we undertake to financially support us. Despite this, even working practices are highly variably, including working agreements that are formed by people choosing to work directly together (e.g., within partnerships or cooperatives) and those that emerge in the context of the kinds of relationships cultivated by social change organisers. Given the many forms of relationships that might form when we work together, this space is intended as a starting point for exploring the possibility that some of the tools from intentional approaches to relationships in non-work contexts can also be useful to those seeking to co-create more intentional working relationships. For instance, taking an intentional approach to working together draws attention to our communication practices within our professional contexts. Paying attention to how we communicate can, in turn, unearth considerations of the specific relationship elements that we include (by choice or otherwise) in the relationships we form in work contexts. In either case some people prefer to avoid mixing the relationship elements associated with work-contexts with those relationship elements in non-work contexts, while other have found value in integrating their ways of relating across their personal and professional spheres.

I'm writing to request that you refer to me as Ari, Caleb's Dad, or by using the pronouns ‘they/them/theirs/themself' going forward. My name is Ari - while I have previously responded to Arianna, Ari better reflects my sense of self. Likewise, I now use the non-binary pronouns ‘they/them/theirs/themself'. When referenced in relation to my child, I am going by typically male parental terms, including ‘Dad’ and ‘father’. While usually associated with a specific gender, parental terms carry many other associations that are valuable for non-binary parents. For me, ‘Dad’ fits best with my gender experience. Thanks in advance,Ari Adapted from private communication, shared with permission, as an example of personal interaction guide specific to changing names, pronouns, and parental terms.

Relationship elements refer to the wide range of basic building blocks from which two or more people might choose to relate to each other. In intentional relationships, these elements are often considered to be independently variable options that can be chosen from multiple options within the relevant contexts. This approach rejects those social norms that perpetuate implicit expectations that what counts as 'a Relationship' can be neatly distinguished from those relationships that are considered 'just' based on 'package-deal sets' of relationship elements. These assumptions can generate a lot of miscommunication. Rather than accept the assumptions built into 'package deals' (such as 'Friends', 'Co-workers', 'Spouse'), an intentional approach to relationships involves actively interrogating these assumptions. One example of taking an intentional approach is to develop a practice of co-desining the collection of elements included in any given relationship (a process sometimes described as agreeing on which 'smorgasbord' options are agreeable for those sharing a given plate of food). This approach to intentional relationships tends to involve explicitly discussing the unique collection of elements that foster ongoing connection in each relationship, and revisiting these as they change over time - both individually and collaboratively. Individually: identifying the forms of potential connection experienced with someone, and specific elements in how you want to maintain and/or change those going forward (if at all). Collaboratively: discussing specific relationship-elements with someone to identify which are present and/or possible in the relationships going forward.

In the context of these Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships, 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 that contributes to the expectation agreements that structure the dynamics of relationships (for example, monogamy vs. non-monogamy). This contributes to escalator narratives and amatonormativity 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 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

In the context of Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships, personal interaction guides are meta-communication tools that provide relevant information to help reduce miscommunications in any type of relationship. These are often written in context-specific ways (see examples below) that outline boundaries and expectation for that context, prior to those times when there isn't time or capacity to HALT and have meta-conversations. Guides for interacting can be written for any context, but are particularly useful for when there are topics we're not used to talking about, situations that are emotionally fraught, and for communicating aspects of our ways of interacting that are unusual or complex. Examples Some examples context-specific user guides are linked to below to illustrate how intricately personalised such guidelines can get (and, therefore, hopefully demonstrating the value of creating personalised guidelines for interacting in almost any context). Guides for new acquaintances & professional contexts:Joel Zaslofky's Personal User Guide (2012) Sid Sijbrandij's Personal User Guide (2019) Steph Smith's Personal User Manual (2019)

In the context of discussing Relationship Elements the following examples are provided to highlight the value of discussing what relationship elements provide the basic building blocks from which two or more people choose to connect with each other - whether ways where structural aspects of various lives are intertwined or during a discrete moment of shared time. Forms of Intimacy Forms of intimacy can be understood as those relationship elements experienced as mutual vulnerability, openness, and sharing - see more Forms of Reciprocity Forms of reciprocity can be understood as those Relationship Elements where each person bears a responsibility for the welfare of the other and, thus, what expectations each might reasonably expect of the other - see more Forms of Mutual Support Mutual support can be understood as the supportive practice that emerge in the one-to-one dynamics of any given relationship, inlcuding emotional support, intellectual support, emergancy support, - see more

I was prompted to curate these Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships by the appreciation shown for the Salon on Intentional Friendships I helped to facilitate at the Embassy Network's Berlin Konsulat in 2018. Prior to this, and since, my approaches to relationships have been influenced by the various intentional communities I have been welcomed into. In addition, I've had the pleasure of co-creating relationships with multiple individuals each of whom contributed to my capacity for meta-communication practices such as identifying and discussing relationship elements and related concepts. I hope these influences are recognisable and that those responsible will help me appropriately acknowledge their contributions as this resource develops further. There is also more than a decades-worth of resources I've learned from, so if you recognise your influence & I've not attributed your work appropriately within this project, please let me know. The following are examples of influences (in addition to those ways that are referenced throughout each resource set): Simon(e) van Sarloos who writes about the situated politics of personal relationships Autumn Elizabeth, Zarinah Agnew, and Alanna Irving who have each shared many fantastic resources and reflections from their experiences within intentional relationships and communities. Aggie Sez (Amy Gahran), who runs the SoloPoly blog, supports various online communities, and wrote the phrase-coining book Stepping Off the Relationship Escalator. Tikva Wolf, who is responsible for the wonderful Kimchi Cuddles Comics, the Polycule Orbit Game, and many other resources on diverse approaches to relationships.

In the context of discussing Relationship Elements the following examples are provided to highlight that there a wide range of different ways to experience initial interest (attraction) in someone and how this may lead to cultivating an ongoing relationship with someone. It is important to appreciate that experincing specific types of attraction/interest can be an independently variable aspect of individual experience. Likewise, while forms of attraction and various forms of connection are often related, there is rarely a one-to-one correspondence. Some contrasting examples to have been indicated for comparison. Aesthetic appeal Initial Iinterest in someone may be experienced as a compelling desire to 'look' at the person (finding their aesthetic compelling) - something that can be experienced independently of any other forms of attraction and without necessarily leading to a desire for a relationship of any kind. Compare with: aesthetic intimacy

In the context of discussing Relationship Elements, forms of reciprocity can be understood as those Relationship Elements where each might reasonably expect of the other in terms of each person accepting responsibility for the welfare of the other. Affinity responsibilities Relationships commitments where each person accepts responsibility for the contributing to the other person's capacity to navigate the impacts of one or more of the contexts that contributes to their affinity intimacies. Availability responsibilities The degree that each person takes responsibility for being available to another in terms of both the frequency and intensity of interaction. This type of description can be used to clarify differing expectations about how and when another person will be available to you in specific ways and negotiating how to balance these differences in ways that sustains the relationship in mutually valued ways. Sometimes the bandwidth of availability each person can expect from another for specific elements of the relationship emerge in practice without explicit negotiation. Other times, specific communication protocols are used to clarify these expectations. Also see Expectation Agreements.

In the context of discussing Relationship Elements, forms of mutual support can be understood as the supportive practice that emerge in the one-to-one dynamics of any given relationship. Identifying these relationship elements can help clarify any Expectation Agreements establishing the types of mutual support that each person can reasonably expect from the other within a given Structural Dynamic. In addition, articulating mutual support dynamics can help in clarifying what, if any, support each person would like to contribute to the other person’s extended community. This might be a matter of providing support through contributing to informal and/or formal systems of mutual aid that extend the support people can provide for each other beyond the immediate one-to-one connections of any given relationship. Emotional support Support for processing experiences, such as active listening, that can be included as an agreed upon form of mutual aid. This requires openness and a non-judgmental practice such that the one who gives support and the one who receives it are open to having their own perspectives transformed in relation to the issue. May require emotional intimacy Intellectual support

In the context of discussing Relationship Elements, intimacy is taken to mean feelings of connection and understanding formed through knowledge and experience of the other. There are many different forms of intimacies but, in the context of intentional relationship elements, the following focuses on those forms of intimacy that emerge through openness, vulnerability, dialogue, transparency, and reciprocity. Clarifying which context-relevant forms of intimacy are present (and/or wanted) in a relationship can help with navigating how other forms of intimacies contribute to the structural dynamics of a relationship, and how these reflect/impact the broader context. There are a range of communication tools that can be useful for negotiating how these intimacies can be sustained in mutually beneficial ways. Aesthetic intimacies Feelings of connection that can emerge through sharing an appreciation of specific forms of artisanal craftmanship and/or beauty such as music, art, food, fashion, tools, environmental wonder, etc.,(compare with aesthetic attraction Access intimacies "Access intimacy is that elusive, hard to describe feeling when someone else “gets” your access needs... It could also be the way your body relaxes and opens up with someone when all your access needs are being met"Mia Mingus, 2011

In the context of these Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships, a relationship can be understood as any connection between two or more people, in whatever form that takes. In contrast to default approaches to relationships, one way to cultivate intentional relationships is through the practice of customising how we relate to each of the people in our lives. This practice of intentionally customising relationships can be both an individual and a collaborative process. As an individual, intentionality includes reflecting on the different elements through which we relate to others in various contexts, and identifying which of these best support an ongoing connection with each of the people we choose to keep in our lives. Extending this intentionality to the deliberate co-creation of specific relationships requires collaboration. One possible approach to this collaborative processes is that of customising the collection of mutually-beneficial elements through which two or more people sustain their ongoing relationships. In addition, taking an intentional approach to relationships can highlight how the dynamics of connection we choose with specific people can contribute to the conditions of constraint & possibility that structure our broader communities.