Non-Romantic Partnerships

In my article on Relationship Anarchy as Consensual Non-Monogamy, I talk about my thoughts behind using Relationship Anarchy as both a guiding relationship philosophy and label under the general umbrella of Consensual Non-Monogamy. But what does that actually look like?

For me, I think that this looks like having multiple committed non-romantic partnerships. I conceptualize it as a close friend who I can be emotionally and physically (non-sexually) intimate with that also has a high degree of reciprocal commitment to each other.

Why multiple?

• It is hard for me to imagine a situation where I would get something out of an exclusive relationship that I couldn’t get out of something non-exclusive. Nothing about the things that I am interested in having requires exclusivity of any kind.
  • Obviously I can definitely see myself getting dropped if a person finds someone else who wants to be exclusive, but c’est la vie.
• I don’t see the benefit in monogamy for me if I have to give up these other potential multiple committed relationships I could have otherwise. However all of this isn’t to say that I need multiple partners, but I think that having a more varied set of partners would be more life-enriching.
  • It would be even better for me if my partner(s) had other partner(s) because it would allow them to have their needs met by a more diverse set of people.

What differentiates this from a friendship?

• To some, this might just look like friendship, to others it might look like romance without the label. Everyone has different ideas about how to differentiate romantic and platonic relationships. I personally choose not to conceptualize of this as platonic or romantic, but a secret third thing.
  • Some people in the A-Spec/LGBTQIA+ community would call it alterous which is a good concept that I think is slightly hard to define, so I choose not to really use it.
• Emotional intimacy is certainly present in most platonic relationships, but physical intimacy much less so, especially cross-gender. Reciprocal commitment is more of a complicated picture because while it is present in friendships, it is usually devalued in its platonic context.

Why partnership?

• I don’t know if I love the term partnership in this case, but I thought it was better than relationship because it synergizes better with the word committed since partnership has a more serious connotation.
• I do want a certain degree of interdependence in a relationship where our lives are intertwined, but not shared finances or shared living situation (or at least not in all of them).

Why non-romantic?

• I say non-romantic mainly because I want to start from scratch instead of using romantic norms as a jumping off point. I think that using the term romance imports too much conceptual baggage. The concept of romance is too highly coupled with monogamy, allosexuality, and other concepts that I’d rather sidestep if I can. In my mind it can be easier or more productive to build something from zero rather than try to reform an existing thing.
• I especially think that the concept of romance starts to break down when you:
  • Don’t want to follow the norms of romantic relationships
  • Aren’t interested in monogamy/exclusivity/hierarchical relationship thinking
  • De-center romance and center friendship
• I also think that romance conjures an image of a kind of passion or emotionally driven relationship, where part of the relationship is keeping that fire alive. My relationships are absolutely founded on the basis of love, but more of love as a choice rather than a certain kind of emotional passion.

What kind of things would be included in the partnership?

• From the Relationship Anarchy Smörgåsbord, here are my personal standings:

Most Drawn To	Emotional Intimacy (Support, Vulnerability, etc.)
	Domesticity (Cooking/Sharing Meals, Shopping, etc.)
	Physical (Non-Sexual) Intimacy (Hugging, Kissing, Cuddling)
	Public Knowledge (Friends, Family, Co-Workers, etc.)
	Companionship & Playfulness (Shared Hobbies/Interests, Parallel Play)
Not Opposed To	Shared Goals
	Caregiving / Co-Caregivers
	Legal (Executor of Will, Power of Attorney)
	Shared Finances
	Sexual Intimacy
Not Interested In	Exclusivity
	Hierarchy
	Religious/Spiritual

• I fully recognize that these kinds of things are subject to change over time, especially as I meet more people and/or my values develop over time, but as of right now this is where I stand.