Date: 07 Dec, 2022
Let us start by saying that I am not perfect at relationship anarchy or marriage consultancy. I’m referring to best practises that are grounded in truth. Marriage probably has no place in pure philosophical relationship anarchy, in my opinion. But in the environment we live in, marriage does not automatically exclude someone from identifying as a relationship anarchist for practical reasons.
Let’s start with a simple illustration. Someone might be married before they learn about relationship anarchy. And it might be a term that accurately describes their relationship(s). But would divorce be necessary for them to engage in relational anarchy? Personally speaking, I disagree. Maybe philosophically, but in the real world, that’s frequently irrational.
People getting married for pragmatic reasons. Such as for tax breaks, insurance, power of attorney, or any of the other hundreds of benefits. People legally acquire merely by signing a marriage certificate. In another scenario in which marriage could have a place in relational anarchy. There are frequently legal avenues to obtaining some advantages. Such as power of attorney. But such are sometimes out of reach for individuals who cannot afford the legal expenses. Or who lack access to resources like the lawyers or documentation necessary in such cases. Additionally, there are no alternate routes for things like insurance and tax benefits.
So how do you make the concepts of marriage and relational anarchy compatible? When a legal marriage is involved, there are a few things that can be done to encourage relational anarchy.
Recognizing The Potential Consequences
Recall how I said that from a philosophical standpoint, anarchic relationships are probably not the place for marriage? There are several valid explanations for that. One reason is that marriage has a troubled past. The fact that it was initially intended to transfer women between father and husband as property. There have been numerous published critiques of marriage that are much more in-depth than I can discuss here. But the institution of marriage has historically been criticised. There are several unsettling practises in marriage even today, some of which I will discuss below.
In reality, a lot of these are issues with cohabitation in general. For this reason, many relationship anarchists are against ever cohabiting or nesting with a partner. We’ll discuss a couple privileges in more detail because it’s a significant component of this.
Because of this, it’s crucial to keep in mind that joining an institution like marriage can actually strengthen it, which would be bad for society as a whole. What can you do, therefore, if you’re married and wish to practise relational anarchy?
Consider starting your opposition from within. Set a good example for how the institution might be challenged. Be outspoken about your anarchist views on relationships and stop making assumptions about marriage. Finally, bear the following recommendations in mind:
Understanding Descriptive and Prescriptive Hierarchies
Relationship anarchy is in direct conflict with prescriptive hierarchies. Such as the kind that governs Primary and Secondary relationships. It limits on the level to which a relationship can ascend. Relationship anarchy is about not placing people in boxes but allowing relationships to develop and expand in the way that best suits the individuals involved.
Nevertheless, whenever there are any two relationships that are not perfectly equal, descriptive hierarchies appear. It makes sense that some relationships be more intimate than others for a variety of factors. Relationship length, level of closeness, and even physical proximity are all relevant considerations. Rather than being actual hierarchies, descriptive hierarchies are a description of what takes place when some relationships are tighter than others. You are more inclined to share information with and involve them in more of your decisions if you live with your legal spouse (or anyone else!). However, living together or being wed are not prerequisites for being “upper” in the descriptive hierarchy. You might be more sexually or emotionally intimate with one spouse but not your nesting partner, or you might be more emotionally intimate with one partner than the other.
Making ensuring that a descriptive hierarchy does not turn into a prescriptive one is crucial. Don’t give one partner control over the other partners and don’t let one relationship influence how other relationships evolve. Relationships shouldn’t be coerced into something “equal,” but they should be allowed to take the shape that is healthiest for everyone involved.
Recognizing the couple’s privilege in marriage
It’s crucial to always bear in mind couple privilege when discussing marriage. Couple privilege will always be an issue, regardless of the type of hierarchy that is or is not obvious. The luxury that comes with a long-standing relationship isn’t always a terrible thing. But it turns bad when it’s exploited to put pressure on or limit someone else.
Married couples must pay extra attention to couple privilege and how to balance it. Even minor components of this permission may be present. How frequently do you use the phrase “We went to the park” with the implicit assumption that everyone understands that “we” refers to “My spouse and I” without accounting for your other partners? Do you anticipate that your spouse will be the sole one accompanying you to family gatherings or holidays? Do you desire children but only intend to have them with your spouse? These aren’t bad choices in and of themselves, but the presumptions can be risky and go against the relationship anarchy notion that each relationship should be allowed to develop and become what is best for each individual.
Marriage itself is a more obvious example of couple privilege. It is illegal to marry more than one person; as a result, any additional partners are not eligible to benefit from the social and financial advantages that come with having a spouse. This leads us to the following action.
Address the emotional and legal entanglements in marriage
Marriage is an entity that carries a lot of burdens and entanglements. Although not necessarily harmful, these factors should be taken into account, particularly if you’re considering it in the context of relational anarchy. It’s crucial to keep in mind that marriage has some emotional presumptions, which you must separate from the legal requirements of marriage if you want to engage in romantic anarchy.
This can be really challenging since other people will assume certain things about you if they know you are married. Our culture is deeply rooted in the idea that you should prioritise your marriage over all other relationships. With the possible exception of children, if you have them. In addition, there is the notion that marriage requires more effort than other forms of partnerships. And that divorce must be prevented at all means, sometimes at the expense of the parties.
Another consideration is the emotional baggage associated with one’s religion. Almost every religion has many presumptions and beliefs around marriage. Therefore whether you identify as religious or had a religious upbringing, you should be aware of these and work to dispel them. The religious beliefs of those close to you should also be taken into account because they may have an impact on how you see marriage.
Practically, you still need to be aware of all legal entanglements, particularly those involving wealth and health. No matter how you feel about a marriage’s emotional features, there will still be legal considerations. These are all-or-nothing situations.
What can you do to affect this division between legal and emotional entanglements, then? You can begin with the following action.
Make no rules.
It is important to reiterate this since it can be particularly challenging for married couples. This is one of the fundamentals of relational anarchy. The ideology of relationship anarchy is completely opposed to rules imposed by one couple on other people. It’s crucial to avoid establishing a veto. Once you do that action, you have completely returned to hierarchical polyamory.
Setting and maintaining your own personal limits is one of the most crucial things to do in a relationship where everything is out of control. You still have preferences and boundaries even if you aren’t the one setting the rules; you just can’t rely on other people to respect your boundaries.
Understand that a relationship is not safeguarded by marriage.
Last but not least, it’s critical to keep in mind that marriage does not safeguard or mend a relationship. Some people get married in the hopes that it will mend their relationship, but all it accomplishes is to add more layers of the legal system. It could be worthwhile to reevaluate whether this is the path you want your relationship to take if this is the reason you got married in the first place.
If it sounds like a lot of effort, that’s because it is. Making sure that your marriage doesn’t interfere with the functioning of your other relationships is particularly challenging while dealing with relationship anarchy.
Our Previous Blogs:
– How blind people sense intimacy?
Follow us on Twitter: @dropd.network