Non-monogamy
Relationship anarchy
Less a relationship structure than a position about structures: that ranking relationships by type — romantic above friendship, sexual above platonic — is a convention rather than a fact.
The term comes from a short manifesto published in Sweden in 2006 by Andie Nordgren, and it has spread well beyond polyamorous circles since.
The central claim
That the standard hierarchy of relationships — spouse first, then partner, then close friend, then friend — is inherited rather than chosen, and that people can decide for themselves what each relationship is, negotiated individually rather than assigned by category.
In practice that means a friendship might involve living together and shared finances while a romantic relationship might not. The point is not that romance is unimportant. It is that the ranking is not automatic.
How it differs from polyamory
| Polyamory | Relationship anarchy | |
|---|---|---|
| Core idea | Multiple romantic relationships | No fixed ranking between relationships |
| Romance | Central category | One category among several |
| Rules | Often negotiated between partners | Negotiated individually, per relationship |
| Hierarchy | May be explicit or rejected | Rejected as a starting principle |
| Applies to | Romantic and sexual relationships | All relationships, including friendships |
Someone can be both — practising polyamory within a relationship-anarchist framework is common. And someone can be a relationship anarchist while monogamous in practice, if that is what their negotiations produced.
Free to join
Find people who get it
Whether you are curious or already experienced, it helps to talk to people who understand the lifestyle. Signing up is free.
Free to join · Adults 18+ · Affiliate link — we may earn a commissionThe practical criticisms
Three come up repeatedly and all three have some force.
It can be used to avoid commitment. “I don't do labels” is sometimes a philosophy and sometimes a way of never having a difficult conversation. The difference is whether the person negotiates specific agreements or simply declines to make any.
Practical entanglement creates hierarchy anyway. Whoever you share a lease and a bank account with has structural priority regardless of what anyone believes. Rejecting hierarchy in principle does not remove it in fact.
It asks a lot of everyone else. Negotiating every relationship from first principles is more work than following a convention, and not everyone wants that work.
What it looks like when it works
- Explicit conversations about what each relationship is, rather than assumptions.
- Willingness to give a friendship the resources usually reserved for a partnership.
- Honesty about practical entanglements that do create priority.
- Agreements that are specific, even though categories are rejected.
The useful test is whether someone's relationships have clear terms. Rejecting inherited categories is a coherent position. Rejecting all definition is usually something else wearing its clothes.
Browse first
Start with a conversation
Almost every couple who describes a good first experience met people online first. Creating a profile is free.
Free to join · Adults 18+ · Affiliate link — we may earn a commissionCommon questions
What is relationship anarchy?
A position that relationships should not be ranked by category — romantic above platonic, sexual above not — and that each one's terms should be negotiated individually.
Is relationship anarchy the same as polyamory?
No. Polyamory is about having multiple romantic relationships. Relationship anarchy is about rejecting fixed rankings between relationships of any kind, including friendships.
Can you be a relationship anarchist and monogamous?
In principle yes, if that is what your negotiations produced. The position is about how relationships are ranked, not how many you have.
Related guides
Last updated: July 2026