What are Default Relationships?

The default approach to relationships seems to idealise collecting a set of pre-packaged relationships within a given cultural context. For example, within the broader societal context I was raised within, the expected set of relationships included a hierarchy of several mutually exclusive categories: a primary partner, familial connections, some close friends, and a wider collection of professional colleagues and social acquaintances from work and community contexts.

In most contexts, there is a hierarchy within the standard set of relationships that are presented as socially acceptable. For example, in the English-speaking media, the default narrative is to priories finding one other person with whom to build a Relationship that includes implicit expectations of specific elements, such as:

a connection dynamic that includes exlcusive romantic and sexual intimacies (i.e. excluding such intimacies with others)
a structure within which each prioritises the other over all other relationships
a high degree of entanglement (living together, integration within extended families, joint-finances, parenting, etc.,)
a shared future that include further 'progression' along an escalator of enmeshment milestones, and collective decision-making about that future.
a visibility expectation for social and legal recognition as a couple

Meanwhile, any other relationships are implicitly expected to include those relationship elements that complement the primary relationship, such as:

a connection that depends on the convergence of each having the flexible availability for shared activities and interests
a dynamic that avoids activities that may contribute to romantic or sexual intimacies
a low degree of entanglement (e.g., minimal involvement in life-changing decisions, separate finances, etc.,)

This means that other pre-categorised forms forms of relationships also carry-along their own set of default assumptions. For example, relationships that form at work often default into taken-for-granted dynamics without any discussion - typically, work-relationships are expected to exclude those elements associated with romantic relationships (e.g., sexual intimacy). Additionally, in contexts with a power-differential, work-relationships are also expected to exclude those relationship elements associated with friendship (e.g., emotional intimacy).

The default approach to capital-R relationships has been widely criticised - for being heteronormative, amatonormative, outcome-focused, and as a form of conditioning to name just a few reasons. From the perspective of intentional approaches to relationships, the default approach functions as a collection of social norms that perpetuate implicit expectations that what counts as 'a Relationship' can be neatly distinguished from those relationships that are considered 'just' (some other form or relationship) based on 'package-deal sets' of relationship elements. For example, the default approach to relationships obscures both the various assumptions entrenched within expectations around marriage as well as the importance of the intimacies that can form in other forms of relationships (such as friendships and [collaborators on work projects]).

These assumptions can contribute to miscommunication within all relationships and generates lot of pressure on solo people to pair up into socially acceptable couples, and the de-prioritisiation of other forms of intimate relationships.

Fortunately, despite the dominance of default expectations, there have always been people who forge their own approach to relationships - for more on those, visit (or return to) the Overview of Resources for Customising Intentional Relationships

Image Not Showing Possible Reasons