Relationship anarchy

A heart with the letter "A" is the most common symbol of relationship anarchy.

Relationship anarchy (often abbreviated to BA or RA from English " relationship anarchy " or Swedish " relationsanarki ") is the practice of maintaining interpersonal relationships on the basis of individual wishes instead of fixed norms and rules.

It differs from polyamory in that it assumes that there is no need to make a formal distinction between different types of relationships. Relationship anarchists view every relationship ( love affairs and others) individually, in contrast to the usual categorization according to social norms such as "only friends", "in a relationship", "in an open relationship " etc.

Origin and Distribution

The term relationship anarchy was coined by the Swedish journalist Andie Nordgren and described by her in several articles. In particular, the Swedish Relationsanarki i åtta punkter brochure , published by Nordgren together with Interacting Arts, quickly spread over the Internet, and before Nordgren even published an English version, it was translated into other languages several times by various people.

Relationship anarchy is also the subject of several academic papers, such as B. the Swedish bachelor theses by Jacob Strandell and Ida Midnattssol. The Open University lecturer and book author Dr. Meg Barker mentions relationship anarchy in her presentation on relationship forms from 2013.

Relationship anarchy was discussed in workshops at OpenCon 2010.

At the IASSCS conference Sex and the market place - what's love got to do with it? In August 2013, a comic book exhibition by the Swedish artist Maria Ellinor Persson took place, in which relationship anarchy was thematized.

In various media that deal with the subject of polyamory , relationship anarchy is reported and discussed again and again - especially the question of whether relationship anarchists should be viewed as a subgroup within the polyamorists, or as an independent movement / subculture that differs from polyamory delimits.

Values and principles

Relationship Anarchists (RAs) prefer not to differentiate interpersonal relationships according to which are considered partnerships and which are not, but instead have a flexible approach within which anything is allowed between two people that both parties agree to.

Important values for relationship anarchists are above all honesty and respect. The mindset of relationship anarchy is derived from the approach that one tries to look at love relationships in the same way as is usually the case with friendships:

Friendships are not exclusive, and friends are happy when you experience something nice with other friends.
You treat each friend differently, not according to a given standard.
You don't have to do everything together and make compromises, but only share what is shared where both interests coincide. Friends don't bend over for the sake of the relationship.
Friendships can change in their form fluently, there is no binary "either together or separately" logic.
One does not have to constantly confirm the status of a friendship through ritualized gestures or sacrifice, but can assume that the friendship is okay as long as the people involved are doing well.
No obligations or claims are derived from the friendship; everything you do is voluntary.

In politically interested, usually left or anarchist circles, relationship anarchy is also understood as a means of political expression - a politicization of the private. This shows that one does not recognize any rule and wants to distance oneself critically from social normativity by applying this principle to one's own relationship life. The classic model of a love relationship is attributed to capitalism , since typical terms such as “I belong to you”, “my friend”, “my wife” etc. indicate a property relationship between the partners.

Similar terms

In left-wing political circles, the term "love without domination" is used synonymously with relationship anarchy. The norm from which one would like to distance oneself is the romantic two-way relationship, abbreviated to RZB.

Relationship anarchy is closely related to polyamory , and many relationship anarchists have multiple sexual, loving, or intimate relationships. A clear difference between polyamory and relationship anarchy is the categorical distinction between love relationships and friendships, which is often (but not always) made by polyamorists. In general, relationship anarchists do not recognize such categorization, nor do they recognize a convention on how to build and maintain relationships or express love. However, many relationship anarchists still consider themselves part of the polyamory movement, as the two concepts very often overlap.

Incorrectly, relationship anarchy is often equated with the concept of “ free love ”, which was designed by hippies at the time of the sexual revolution . Free love, however, emphasizes more the possibility of quickly changing sexual partners without emotional ties, while relationship anarchy also includes the possibility of long-lasting relationships, and also places relationships that are not based on sexuality on the same level.

Web links

Love, Amelie (translated to: Nordgren, Andie). "Relationship Anarchy in 9 Points" , More Space for Love , February 6, 2014.
Nordgren, Andie. "The short instructional manifesto for relationship anarchy" , Andie's Log , July 6, 2012. (English)
Love, Amelie (translated to: Nordgren, Andie). "Relationship Anarchy - Love According to the Friendship Principle" , More Space for Love , February 6, 2014.
Nordgren, Andie. "Relationsanarki" , Dr. Andie , 2004. (Swedish)

Individual evidence

↑ Deborah M. Anapol: Polyamory in the 21st Century: Love and Intimacy with Multiple Partners (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010), p. 207. “For Andie, the polyamory community has' too many outdated values about gender, sexuality, power , and love and is too focused on definitions and rules and making new mental institutions for managing love relationships with several people instead of just one. Since I was interested in escaping the idea that love needed rules and institutions to survive, I never felt much at home ', she says. "
Andie summarizes her position as follows:" I felt a need to put another piece on the table, so that the scale of possible relationship choices didn't just go between monogamous to polyamorous but had a third, outer point - relationship anarchy. This is how I see the scale these days. Monogamy says love is only for two people; everyone knows the drill. Polyamory says love relationships can be between several people in various configurations, but there is still a difference between those who are 'partners' in various ways and those who are not. Relationship anarchy says the gray scale between love and friendship is so gray that we cannot draw a line, and thus we shouldn't institutionalize a difference between partners and nonpartners. "
She realizes that from a monogamous worldview, polyamory looks no different from relationship anarchy , but to a relationship anarchist, the question "how many partners do you have?" makes no sense and is actually offensive. "The term is meant to put a useful label on an attitude that I feel is different enough from the mainstream polyamory that deals with a lot of defining things like primary partners, jealousy and time management, and so on to deserve its own term," she concludes.

^ Andie Nordgren: Relationsanarki . 2004. Archived from the original on February 6, 2014. Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved February 6, 2014. @1@ 2

↑ Det fria subjectets discourse: en analyzes av de discursors som möjliggör relationsanarkins discourse och praxis. . 2011. Archived from the original on December 6, 2013. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved July 14, 2013. @1@ 2

↑ Ett relationsanarkistiskt ställningstagande - en undersökning av subjektspositionering inom relationsanarki . March 19, 2013. Retrieved July 14, 2013.

^ Meg Barker: Rewriting the Rules: Non / monogamies . January 23, 2013. Retrieved July 5, 2013.

↑ So what's OpenCon all about, then? . October 5, 2011. Retrieved July 5, 2013.

↑ Programs - IASSCS 2013 Conference . Archived from the original on February 22, 2014. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved February 6, 2014. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / iasscs.org

^ Exhibitions and Screenings . Archived from the original on February 22, 2014. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved February 6, 2014. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / iasscs.org

^ Relationship Anarchy as unruly political economy? . Retrieved on February 6, 2014. ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Dead Link / unruly-ra.com
↑ From Monogamish to Relationship Anarchy: a Widening Poly Spectrum . May 18, 2012. Retrieved February 6, 2014.
^ Andie Nordgren: Relationsanarki . 2004. Archived from the original on February 6, 2014. Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved February 6, 2014. @1@ 2

↑ Amelie Liebe: relationship anarchy - love based on the principle of friendship . February 6, 2014. Retrieved February 6, 2014.

^ Andie Nordgren: Love made me do it . 2004. Archived from the original on October 30, 2013. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved February 6, 2014. @1@ 2

↑ Love in Capitalism . February 6, 2012. Retrieved February 6, 2014.

↑ WHY? - To love without domination . September 26, 2013. Retrieved February 6, 2014.

↑ The romantic two-person relationship . December 29, 2011. Retrieved February 6, 2014.

^ Andie Nordgren: Poly - bara en bieffekt . 2004. Archived from the original on February 22nd, 2014. Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved February 6, 2014. @1@ 2

[1] Deborah M. Anapol: Polyamory in the 21st Century: Love and Intimacy with Multiple Partners (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010), p. 207. “For Andie, the polyamory community has' too many outdated values about gender, sexuality, power , and love and is too focused on definitions and rules and making new mental institutions for managing love relationships with several people instead of just one. Since I was interested in escaping the idea that love needed rules and institutions to survive, I never felt much at home ', she says. "
Andie summarizes her position as follows:" I felt a need to put another piece on the table, so that the scale of possible relationship choices didn't just go between monogamous to polyamorous but had a third, outer point - relationship anarchy. This is how I see the scale these days. Monogamy says love is only for two people; everyone knows the drill. Polyamory says love relationships can be between several people in various configurations, but there is still a difference between those who are 'partners' in various ways and those who are not. Relationship anarchy says the gray scale between love and friendship is so gray that we cannot draw a line, and thus we shouldn't institutionalize a difference between partners and nonpartners. "
She realizes that from a monogamous worldview, polyamory looks no different from relationship anarchy , but to a relationship anarchist, the question "how many partners do you have?" makes no sense and is actually offensive. "The term is meant to put a useful label on an attitude that I feel is different enough from the mainstream polyamory that deals with a lot of defining things like primary partners, jealousy and time management, and so on to deserve its own term," she concludes.