Are stability and relationship anarchy incompatible?

Many people within my life, whether they are monogamous or polyamorous, have responded with caution when I mention the concept of relationship anarchy. The concept of relationships being shaped and reshaped, and individuals having complete freedom over what they share with who, can feel daunting for some people. In a world where we have not developed enough skills to navigate fluidity and change, it can feel overwhelming to have to continuously question what a relationship is and design it based on the deeper fundamentals of who you are and what you desire at that moment in time, rather than on a simple label or static status.

Quite often people incorrectly believe fluidity equals instability. This belief is held both by people with systemic power who want to maintain a status quo which provides them with comfort and control, as well as by people who are oppressed and harmed by the system. We are taught that if we can manage to gain some security and certainty we will be safer within that system. Even though my body and brain actually feels more steady and grounded when I’m able to flow and loosen my grip on the world around me, there are very few situations where I feel comfortable enough to flow in that way without harm or risk. As a result someone like me could incorrectly assume that it is the fluidity and uncertainty within my life that is dangerous. But the truth is simply that our systems and structures are not built to support fluidity and flow - they are rigid and ruptured - and so therefore flowing within them can bring risks. 

Rigid categorisation is deeply woven in the fabric of our society and legal systems. Throwing away that categorisation (and the inherent hierarchies that come with it) is like stripping off naked at a party. While that might be liberating for some, many of us may experience more vulnerability than others when enacting that. As Andie Nordgen writes in the Road to Relationship Anarchy: “The cost of making a completely custom relationship agreement can look very different for different people, and the tyranny of “structurelessness” must be considered — where too little structure can turn into power and benefit for those who already possess it. Relationship Anarchy must be equipped with this power analysis, and be open for declaring structure to relationships when it’s needed to protect individuals from each other.” (Thanks to my good friend Chan for bringing my attention to this quote)

In addition, regardless of the structures we are part of, we do all crave and need consistent love to feel secure. Whether that’s from ourselves, our partners, or our friends. Within our society we have falsely presumed that monogamy and romantic love is synonymous with commitment, consistent love and stability. And in turn we have wrapped up all forms of relating into that monogamous commitment - sexual intimacy, emotional intimacy, financial support, co-habiting etc. This is why it is easy for so many of us to perpetuate the hierarchy that suggests romantic love from a single partner should be prioritised above all else. 

While many people perceive Relationship Anarchy as anti-hierarchy, in my experience the underlying nature or need behind some hierarchies may still exist. It’s just that there isn’t any hard or fast rules around them being arbitrarily dictated by labels. Instead you are consciously engaging yourself and your connections in deep work to ensure you are making choices that reflect your autonomy rather than narratives that have been put upon you.

Relationship Anarchy allows me to unpack presumed norms around what stability and love is, and instead create more conscious, valuable  and aligned versions of love and care with my partners, friends and communities. For me it is about unpacking every layer of care and pleasure that we might share with other people, and actively deciding whether that is truly important or not within a given context. We design our relationships based on us as individuals and collectives rather than presuming you have to do something or prioritise something because other people tend to wrap those things up together, or because that’s how you’ve done things in the past. 

As an example I used to think that sharing your money with a romantic partner was a sign of deep connection, trust and commitment to mutual support. But having been through a relationship where much of the latter wasn’t actually present and I experienced financial hardship as a result, I’ve learnt that there might be situations where I need to maintain financial independence regardless of how much I care about someone else. At the same time there are other contexts where it makes entire sense to share finances… not necessarily because of love but because of a communal commitment to investing in a particular kind of life together.  At a more basic level an ex of mine used to praise me for bringing them a glass of water when we went to bed - saying I demonstrated so much more care than their other partner who would never do this. At the time I didn't see it as a important act of love, but the status they had given it made me panic about regularly servicing them with water to show them I cared. And since then I’ve event found myself having momentary unexpected feeling of resentment when my current partners don’t bring me water at bedtime - even though it never was and never will be important to me personally.

Within Relationship Anarchy, if I am someone that needs more emotional intimacy than others, then I am free to seek and cultivate that from multiple sources. I can make it central to all kinds of different relationships, whether that’s my partner, a friend, a therapist or the person that runs my local gym. The same goes with sexual intimacy. If that is core to my experience of the world and it helps to keep me grounded I can seek that with whoever I wish whenever I desire. Or perhaps sexual intimacy gets in the way of emotional intimacy for me, so I can choose to prioritise the latter as core to a relationship with a long-term partner, and only enjoy the former sporadically with other connections.  

For me relationship anarchy in a broad sense, and non-monogamy more specifically, is just an extension of how we should all be learning to relate to others if we want to create a society that values individual autonomy and collective care, over and above rules and hierarchies enforced by those who wish to oppress and control the behaviours and freedoms of others. 

Capitalism wants you to wrap up every single need into one person because it means you have to pay to outsource anything you can’t manage or meet within your household. In most situations it is nearly impossible for a couple to single-handedly raise children, financially support a family and still maintain nourishing intimacy - unless they can afford to pay a nanny to be their co-caregiver. Capitalism believes it is acceptable for a low-paid cleaner to help you out in your home, but it does not like it when multiple adults wish to live together out of love and friendship in order to share this burden collectively. 

Growing up in a society fuelled on isolation, it is no wonder that desperation for control and order becomes the stance that many of us adopt when it comes to relationships. As our one last life line to connection and care, loving relationships become a commodity that someone or something else could ‘steal’ at any time. Why do children act out so viscerally when they parents are glued to their phones? Because someone is stealing our attention. 

But we will only be able to access everything we need to cultivate healthy, stable, consistent care when we learn that we cannot control other people’s behaviours, and that our relationships are only worth as much as the value we wish to create together rather than the status or obligation that is bestowed to us by society based on exclusivity, marriage or child-rearing.

Relationship anarchy isn’t disarray and chaos. It is a way of building thoughtful, empowering relationships that generate mutual value for those participating in that relationship, Only once we are capable of experiencing multiple deeply mutual and profound relationships in a variety of ways within our communities will we understand what true stability and limitless love and care can look like.