Ep 2: Relationship Anarchy (LIVE)

Are you curious about relationship anarchy (RA)?

First coined by Andie Nordgren, RA has roots in political ideology and calls for relationships not to be bound by rules aside from what the people involved mutually agree upon. It rejects a formal distinction between sexual, romantic, or platonic relationships. So what does that look like day to day? Can you practice RA and sustain long term relationships? What is the difference between relationship anarchy and nonhierarchical polyamory?

Effy facilitates the conversation with a diverse set of relationship anarchists on this live panel.

To find more about Effy Blue and Jacqueline Misla, follow them at @wearecuriousfoxes, @coacheffyblue, and @jacquelinemisla on Instagram.

If you have a question that you would like to explore on the show, reach out to us and we may answer your question on one of our upcoming episodes. Leave us a voicemail at 646-450-9079 or email us at listening@wearecuriousfoxes.com

Follow us on social media for further resources on this topic:
fb.com/WeAreCuriousFoxes
instagram.com/wearecuriousfoxes

Join the conversation: fb.com/groups/CuriousFox

Support the show

TRANSCRIPT:

Hi, my name is Effy Blue. And this is the Curious Fox podcast. Curious Fox the community for those who challenge the status quo in love, sex, and relationships. Every month, we'll pick a theme anchored in love sex and relationships. I asked a diverse set of panelists to meet with me and an audience of curious foxes in Brooklyn, New York. Together, we explored the theme through personal stories. This month, we decided to tackle the topic of relationship anarchy, or RA for short. relationship anarchy as underpinnings and political ideology of anarchy. For a lot of people, the word anarchy can carry some negative connotations, so it can be hard to imagine it's a model for a healthy relationship. Sometimes the word anarchy conjures up images of violence, chaos and apocalyptic disarray. But this misconception really dismisses the lessons that the relationship anarchy can teach us. When I looked closely at the beliefs of anarchy, I was very surprised to find how closely it aligns with non violent ideologies such as Buddhism. One of the panelists in today's discussion, windy, identifies as a practicing Buddhist, an RA. And I'm excited for you to hear her perspective on how these two parts of air connect at its core, and it is about autonomy, an absence of hierarchy. It's an anti authoritarian political philosophy that advocates for self governance is opposes capitalism, the state and representative democracy. At this month curious Fox, we explored the intersection of this deeply critical school of thought with the interpersonal realm. In my research for today's theme, I read the work of Andy Nordgren, who coined the term relationship anarchy. In her short instructional manifesto for relationship anarchy, she talks about how ra can support an abundance of love how ra can respect and honor the uniqueness of relationships, how it operates from a self selected core set of values, and rejects the burden of normativity. To not win, relationship anarchy works best from a place of deep trust, and assuming the best of intentions. relationship anarchy is not for everyone, including me. But the exploration of this topic has takeaways for everyone in any type of relationship, honoring your and your partner's autonomy, effectively addressing power dynamics in your relationships, deep trust. These are all tenants of successful relationship anarchy, and values, I want to bring in my own relationships. At curious Fox, we want to encourage curiosity and provide a space for exploration through connection and story. Ra is a big topic. And our socials are not and will never be the final word on any topic. But we had a great discussion this month, and I'm looking forward to sharing it with you. Enjoy the episode.

Good evening, everyone. Good to have you here. Hello, just in case you didn't know you're Curious Fox. We are a community. For those who challenge the status quo in love, sex, and relationships. We've been running these events for almost three years now. We don't preach we don't promise anything. We just present ideas and invite you to consider them. If it resonates with us great. If it doesn't, hopefully, you're entertained. Before I carry on. I'm going to just introduce you to Jackie, who's my collaborator, and she has something to add,

I want to tell you a little bit about Patreon. So as Effy said about three years ago, curious Fox started, it was born from a need from the community to have more access to information and community and a place to ask questions that felt safe and interesting and encouraging. And so from that all of this was born in the spirit of challenging the status quo and love, sex and relationships. And so we've done a lot over the past three years, all the events that she's mentioned, and building up this community that not only exists in New York, but exists around the world. And we want to continue to expand that. So in order to do everything that is on our wish list, which essentially is everything on your wish list that you have told us that we've added to our wish list, we need additional resources. And so because this was born out of the community, and we do this to support the community, we are coming to the community to ask the community for support. So to that end, we've started a Patreon page. Patreon is a fund raising platform. You get to choose how you want to support it could be $1 $5 $10 $20 that you give every month and in exchange for not only supporting this for allowing this to grow for allowing us to take this community and this conversation outside of just basements in Bushwick, we, you get cool stuff. So you get access to our Facebook page where there's a lot of content and conversation and dialogue and videos, you get to submit specific questions that you may have about things that are going on in your life. And we get our experts to answer those questions for you. If you are not in New York, and you're listening, you get a Google Hangout, and you get to hang out with us and ask us questions and talk, you get free tickets, you get curious Fox swag. And so I encourage you to go on, there are signs everywhere of where you can find us on Patreon. We are curious foxes, that is also our handle for Instagram, and Facebook. And anywhere you can find this in our in our podcast is there. So we encourage you to support if you like what's happening in these conversations, if you want more of this, if you want the people back home who aren't here to get this, if you want someone else to listen to this, if you want to have more dialogues and more events, then we encourage you to support. Thank you.

Thank you, Jackie, she does so much better than I do. Thank you. So today we're going to discuss relationship anarchy, the way the flow of this is gonna go, I'm gonna pass it on to my panelists who are individually going to introduce themselves and tell you their story of who they are, what they're about, and why they're practicing relationship anarchy in their lives. I'm going to introduce myself last. And then after that, we're going to open it up to questions. So this is really about you. This is about your curiosity. We say no pressure, no promises, just curiosity. And we'll start with Amir and the further end, and we're gonna come in.

Yeah, thanks for organizing this way. I'm here. And I, in some ways, I guess I was sort of a relationship anarchists. As soon as I started dating, although I had no idea that there was a name for it, I had no access to any information about non monogamy as a philosophy, a relationship orientation, anything like that grew up in a very heteronormative militaristic, somewhat matches, society, a lot of pressure to kind of conform. And I remember sort of really challenging a lot of the ideas about why people kind of formed these couple units and you know, for marriages, and all these rules and ideologies around that, and wanting to challenge it, and, and basically trying to actually relate to, you know, form intimate relationships around me in different ways. And eventually kind of succumbing to the pressures. So after several years of trying to do that, I ended up in a very monogamous marriage. This was after I came to New York already. And then roll the clock forward about 15 or more years, opened up that marriage and went through the whole sort of journey that most people tend to go through the con to non monogamy, from the more traditional sort of marriage kind of framework, and then trying to sort of deconstruct that and find other ways of forming relationships, which we'll we'll get to, I guess, in this discussion, and then it was a long journey to eventually find myself back where I was when I was 15. I think in terms of really trying to challenge all those social constructs about how relationships should form, what makes for an intimate relationship, how one defines them, how one sort of works with them. And that's sort of been I think, my last sort of three years or so just trying to kind of live in that mindset and the framework and, you know, we'd love to talk about more about what that means.

We're doing name pronouns, or we're doing pronouns named Wendy, she, they, I really loosely identify as a relationship anarchist, and hybrid, hybrid relationship anarchist and anarchist and Buddhist practitioner because it has highly informed the way that I do relationship. I loosely identify because I don't really adhere to labels. I don't internalize labels either. I think they're really excellent pointers, but really awful identities. And for me, I I experienced them as being fairly limited, so, so are a Buddhist. I think really from the onset, I was really put off with the idea of hierarchical relationships and monogamy. I never married, I did want children and I chose to have children and raise them on my own. My children have been fundamental teachers in doing relationship, I've experienced the most intimacy with them, I've experienced the most letting go with them. It's they're really, really were phenomenal teachers in so far as learning a lot about autonomy and letting them have autonomy, allowing myself to have it, learning that relationships transition, and they do soar. Do so organically. And so I really think that my approach was highly informed by having kids and being a parent. I did effort to do monogamy a few times in my life, and they were always short lived and felt pretty unnatural to me. So I think I sort of loosely practiced RA for a long time. Before I really knew what it was. And I'd say in the last five years, I probably more concretely and with greater awareness, do Ra. And, and again, like I said, my Buddhist practice and mindfulness practices have been really instrumental in being able to do that. skillfully.

That's about it. I got, hey, I'm Concetta. She, they her doesn't really matter to me. Yeah, I really, the labels are kind of strange, because that's the point of anarchy is that you don't group and here we are talking about our group. Yeah, it's a little confusing in that sense. But all I can speak from is from what comes naturally to me, as opposed to anarchy as a philosophy, you know, as a as a theory, I'm, I'm really going to come at it just from what, what, how I relate, it wouldn't be possible to talk about this without going into childhood. I grew up in a family of nine children in Asia, a very atypical childhood, I was always in the spotlight always on stage, for better and for worse. And my mother was extremely hierarchical. When it came to love and attention and affection. Boys were first women were second. And then we all had our roles, like we had to prove ourselves for being good at something. And so from very young age, I learned that love came in hierarchy, and I had to earn attention. And then, when I was 13, I was kicked out of my home. And I went into the foster care system in Asia, which was a long journey of trying to find security. And this is the part that I wasn't going to talk about. But this is literally why I find myself seated here today, what I noticed the most hurtful parts of being in the foster system were actually the good memories, because I always knew they weren't going to last when I found a family that was wonderful, that actually had the non abusive, kind, loving everything I always wanted as a child, just unconditional love. I knew there was a clock ticking. Why? Because I was not their actual child. So at some point, it was going to end. And that is what cemented for me this sense that when I'm looking for love, I don't want conditions on it. I don't want any classifications for this. And I didn't understand it at the time that that's what I was looking for. Fast forward. I grew up Christian, extremely conservative. I met someone fell in love when I was 19. Stayed with this person. Ended up getting married at 24 abstinence. Yeah, all of that sexual morality, everything. You know, right now I look, I look one way, but I grew up very differently. I'm a performer today in New York City. Midlife, many people in this non monogamous journey started out monogamous with traditional values, not really chosen, but chosen for us, right culturally. By year eight, I booked a national tour. And the first I was married at this point. And the first question people asked me after congratulations was, but what will your partner say? And I didn't like it really didn't even occur to me that this was a form of sexism or patriarchal hierarchical relationship constructs. Like I didn't I just confused like, What do you mean what, what he what he say? And this just continued, but what will he do? Is he okay with it? And when I talked to him about it, he didn't understand that either. So both of us are kind of perplexed like What do you mean? Love me? Support me be happy for me all of those things. That continued we opened up our relationship. I've been open for three years polyamorous for two and I discovered this like anarchy word. Because when I started dating, like this was like really scandalous. I was dating other people who were like married or You know, like, just figuring out where you fit on OkCupid? You know, and, and I would, I would, I would meet these guys who had facial hair. So they looked like my partner. So it was like, okay, and and we'd be sitting there and talking and like some of the first conversation starters were like, let me tell you about my construct, you know, we did on Thursdays, you know, my partner, and I split all of our bills when we date, you know, like they had, like, all these rules. And, and like, again, I didn't understand anarchy. I didn't even understand polyamory. And I was like, what is that? I, the whole point of opening this up was to be open. Like, this is so structured. And like, again, I didn't have the word spirit. But it's it just to me, there's nothing wrong with hierarchy. But for me, it felt wrong. There was just so many rules, the more into polyamory I got the worse off, I felt and I was like, What is this I don't understand, because I love the idea of open sex, love, communication, freedom to explore whatever I want. And yet, everybody I'm dating, who says those things on their profile, have more rules than monogamous men do. And women, and I couldn't understand that. And, and it was through these like constant relationships that someone called me an anarchist. And it was like, like Bernie Sanders.

And so like, and that was the journey, you kind of start to discover it, you know. And then I realized on these dates, it was kind of like, these partners were showing their pool hours, like, here's our pool hours, bathing suits only. On weekends, potential nudity allowed, you know, you may have a child, but escort over the age of 18. Right. That's what it felt like dating them. But on my end, I was like, I mean, I have a pool. And like, if you want to be nude, you can go over there. And the pool of people can be there. And there's like, the shallow side, if you want to, like do synchronized swimming, like, the middle is really great for that, you know, and that's like, how I feel about relationships is like, I don't and I think this is like, if you Google anarchy and relationship hierarchy, the things that will show up are autonomy, which is really big. And for me, that means I'm not going to ask you for permission. But that doesn't mean I don't give, can I swear on this, that doesn't mean I don't give a shit. And that's the misconception that I find a lot of people have about anarchy, and non hierarchal relationships is that we just do whatever the fuck we want. And that's just, I think that's just up to the individual. However you are as a person. And for me

that can exist, whether or not you're Ra. That's just a

person by person quality, right? So everywhere, what makes anarchy what it is, is, is autonomy, I'm not going to ask you for permission, but I give a shit about how you feel. So there's a lot of communication, I want to know if my actions are impacting you, and how to make you more comfortable. But I don't always want to tell you where I am. And you kind of have to be okay with that. And we can talk about that and create agreements. But I'm not going to ask you, if I can be a performer, I'm not going to ask you in the same way, if I can have a mom, I'm not going to ask if I can have children, I'm not going to ask you if I can go fuck someone tonight. You know, like, that's, that's, that's on me. And I'm not going to expect you to, to come to me, it works both ways. For me, that's the number one of relationship anarchy. And a lot of people disagree with this. And that's okay. But for me, that's number one. That's that's why I really relate to this.

That's exactly the discussions that we want to have tonight. And I don't want to interrupt the flow, but I will introduce myself quickly. For those who don't know me. My name is Effie blue. I'm a relationship coach, I work with people who are curious about transitioning into or have hit a roadblock in open relationships. That's what I do by day. And then I also do this I'm curious, Fox is my baby, I have some awesome people who helped me. And, you know, I'm curious by nature and and love sex and relationships is my realm. And this is, you know, this is why I'm here. And why make these events happen. On that note, I have I am filled with questions, which I'm going to pose but it is also a good time to open it up to the floor as well.

The second one, after autonomy, I knew there was something in my notes that I was going to bring up. And so another thing another reason I relate to this word of anarchy is because I don't classify my romantic relationships as one and then my friendships as another so it

doesn't give special status to relationships in which sex is happening or relationships which you may be experiencing high degrees of intimacy. Yeah, that was really important that

stuck with me from being young in the sandbox when we're all just playing. That's still here now and like Amir I did the whole marriage thing, but ended up persisting and running away from All of it and coming back to the sandbox where we, my best friend live from your fort when I was 18. She's still in my life. And when she calls, she matters just as much as the partner who I live with and have sex with. And this new person I'm dating that I'm really excited about, he could matter to I have the same space, I have that kind of emotional space that not everybody would have

I stay away from the labels that you used, they're actually best friend, because what does it do to all your other friends? Yeah, and partner, especially when we say my partner that then suddenly they belong to you. They're a thing that belongs to I like names are pretty good. It is a tricky thing, because we're like we're read rewiring, we can't do ra perfectly. That's the number one thing to, to bring up here. We don't do ra perfectly, it is been done by very few people. And we are effectively confronting our conditioning and resisting the way that groups family societies have been organized. And so there's a major learning curve. For me, that's where Buddhist practice comes in. Because it really encourages being comfortable with ambiguity, it really encourages spacious mind. It encourages me to be fully embodied to my emotions, such as jealousy, such as, you know, all of the those things that come up, I get to fully experience without retracting or reacting. So coming back to that the way that those labels are used, it's so natural for us. And I've done it and I think we do it to sort of resort to them, but in a say in the same sense it it sort of reinsert rolling things.

For me, it's not something that I find limiting, but I can totally see where coming from.

Yeah, I've had to, like, invent new language and try to use it. And I really just love calling everybody friend, that super like, because it's friendly. It's like nice and sweet. And like valid. Except for my kids. I still just I don't call them friend usually. But they're allowed to call me by my first name that is totally acceptable.

Awesome. This is super interesting to see sort of where you where you are at right now. And I am gonna continue to shed briefly like the background, how she got to this philosophy today. I would love to hear that if you're comfortable. I would love to hear that from you a little bit. Like what? What was your journey? Like? What led you here? What were the markers along the way that led you to to practice something like relationship anarchy? And, and also, I we talked about it a little bit. You know, anarchy is a political belief and belief. So it's not just something that you practice in your relationships, but it's a way of life. Well, it

is now. Yeah, I think I know what you're saying, what are the underpinnings? Well, I grew up in the punk rock scene, I grew up a squatter, in fact, and, and so I really lived anarchy as as a kid, I also found a lot of the things that happened in the punk rock scene are not anarchy. That are, they're quite the opposite. So I grew up in the punk rock scene, I was really I was exposed to Buddhist practice, and Eastern thought really early on it, it's very fascinating to me how the two actually can and do coexist. And they support each other. And I feel like, you know, they balance each other out for me, and they, it's, I've not once come into conflict with it. But yeah, so I grew up in the punk rock scene. So it's really it was. And I, you know, I obviously gravitated to that scene because of some innate qualities in me, that really craved autonomy. But also, I mean, in the, in the, within the light of Ra, like I understood and valued a collective approach to I think I really have a sort of sense of collective individualism, you know, where I both respect other people's choice to be autonomous and to be an individual and to respect their own process and to respect their growth. That is 100%. Like, all my relationships have to be growth based. Like, it doesn't even matter if you're doing my taxes, like, I really will gravitate to people who are mostly just really, really interested in growing. Without going without, yeah, so so. So for me, it's a huge anchor, because it's like, I need things to be growth based. And if doing you means not doing that thing I would prefer you to do, then that's okay. Actually, as long as is you're going where you grow. And as long as you're letting me do that also. It's super important. And I think I've always valued that. And it's been fundamental and it's been with me since my like early punk rock days. Yeah, I think that pretty much covers it. Those were really big influencers in my life early on.

Yeah. Yes, you bring up the issue of control Well, I and to relate it to the question about political underpinnings and the philosophy aspect of Ra. If you think about monogamy and what it what it means, you know, it's, it's interesting because we don't tend to think about it, and until we go outside of it, and then we start to look at it and try to deconstruct it. But it really is, in many ways built on the notion of control and ownership. And one could basically see the beginning of it in the agricultural revolution with a notion of ownership of land, and then ownership of the people who work the land, and then ownership of the people who raised the people who work the land, right. So it really in many ways, in my mind as a philosophy and a social sort of construct monogamy is all about owning people and controlling them. And so non monogamy as a philosophy, in my mind is all about deconstructing that. So you're asking about how I came to those ideas, I think a lot of them were very sort of unformed an earlier age. But as I started to practice non monogamy, you know, first, coming across words like polyamory much earlier, and, and having similar experience to what you're describing Concetta realizing that a lot of the worlds of polyamory and non monogamy are really just repeating the same ideas, adaptationist adaptations, right, so you kind of take away the sexual exclusivity aspect, right? So when I say that it's a big construct, right. It's three different things when people say monogamy one is sexual exclusivity as a practice. And that's the first thing people usually start to take away when they want to practice other things, then there's the notion of the sort of relationship orientation, right, which I think a lot of us have this sort of non monogamous orientation that does have the need and want to have more intimate relationships in many more ways. And then there's the philosophy and the sort of social kind of implication of what it means to control others and be in an intimate relationship with another wedded means about their responsibility for your emotions, for instance, right, a lot of the philosophical underpinnings and in my mind, its relationship anarchy is the first sort of time that we're trying to formulate a lot of those ideas around a more cohesive sort of philosophical framework that really goes back way back to an arc of feminism of like Emma Goldman, and even further back to individual anarchism. So it is sort of like you're saying we're still forming that it's

very much in its infancy. Also,

I think by nature, it's going to evolve, right? If you think about the way it's non governance, about autonomy, it's about flow. It's about moving with the needs of the group as it changes in the present moment in the present moment. So by nature, I think it's gonna keep evolving, keep changing, keep shifting, if I'm not, if I'm not mistaken. Yeah. But

isn't that like the nature of relationship already? And I mean, I think one of the things we're taking away is like, all of this sort of concepts, we have all the ideas we have around it around relationship, and we're then just allowing it to sort of happen organically, and pulling back some of the ways that we control relationship. Yeah.

Ultimately, what all three of us have in common is that we're seeing what comes most naturally, as opposed to what's been done.

From the EU, to you guys are kind of like it was always there. I just didn't know it. I didn't know I didn't have a language for the inheritance of you know, the punk rock scene and

Buddhists found it you found it so young.

Yeah, I had a sweet inheritance there. But like, it's what's really cool. And I've heard that before is that people say, it was just kind of always there. Like I had these ideas. I felt this way. I just didn't know what that looked like. And even when I did find Ra, it was a relief, like when I found that this is a thing and actually, it's not just on my mind, or it's not just the way that I'm functioning. I felt included, for sure.

Included. Yeah, that's that's that's like the best part of it is when you feel fully part of the party, you know,

and you were saying that you shouldn't that you feel it's radical because we're on the fringes and we're usually the only person in the room and we're even in a non monogamous

you know how many times I have to and it's I enjoy talking about it. Like I don't look miserable right now. I don't think like What's what's not so enjoyable? Is all of the implications that come at you. Where's your partner? Oh, he's not here again, huh? Real really like you guys laugh, but and you all laugh but like, I get that all the time. I'm still with the partner that I was married, there's a lot of explaining, and they don't understand why I do things separately. And I might not always know where he is because this person is an individual that I love and appreciate and want to let him free. That's actually really hard to explain, because our society, for me non monogamy and polyamory and then monogamy. I agree, they're kind of similar, because they're just different levels of control a lot of the times it's like, I don't want to control your dick, but I want to control your heart. Well, I mean, but like, ultimately, that's all fear, but take a gentler

approach, I think they're all different ways of organizing. Where we're moving, we're moving from, you know, this really sort of intellectual mind, which has value intellectual mind space, and from as a meditator, I would see that, as our people who are practicing Ra, we're sort of moving from a different space, we're allowing more spaciousness more, that's how I feel.

And that was originally what we were talking about is that if you prefer, you know, no, no titles, if we just go names there, Steven and Olivia, Olivia has been in my life, Steven, shorter amount of time. One of them I'm actually secretly still married to. And we've talked about, like divorcing and not telling anyone, and then when we die, everybody will find out. But now, this is not a podcast. But I don't think my mom's listening to this. So she won't know. But I'm like the fact that I love them both. And I have space for both of them. And they actually ask for different space from me. So the classification only exists on the individual level, my space for you, and my space for you, is truly about what you and I need from each other and what you and I need from each other. Not because well, you and I met each other first. And so this is what we've decided. Is this, okay? Okay, great. Okay, so what what I'm okay with is this. And that's the difference.

I really like to use my children in this. I'm like an all children if you're a child, and we all are or a parent, you know that you don't love one kid more than the other? It's actually not possible. Yes, they're two totally different kids are two different people, you have a different bond, they have different needs. And so as someone who has to organize a small society called my family I know that there is structure I know that there is but I know the walls are moving all the time. And I know that I efforting to be completely embodied to our experience,

for sure. Yeah. Questions, we can keep talking. Any questions,

we can keep talking?

So I'm just curious, like, this is the first time I've heard coming to this event about relationship anarchy, though I've been known about polyamory for many, many years. It seems that involves a lot of trust. And I'm just curious, how do each of the panelists deal with the challenges around that? Because this isn't, seems to me takes an even deeper level of trust. Because the less structure you have, the more trust there has to be?

Sure, I mean, I think we actually assume trust. It's one of the principles of, of Ra is that yeah, I was saying it's similar to the notion of the assumption of positive intent. You know, so you come to a relationship from a place of assuming the other person is, you know, not they're trying to hurt you or, or, and I think that does wonders to relationships to sort of take that as the basis even when you are challenging and in you are hurt, even when you are in difficult sort of emotional situations, to always sort of come back to that as the kind of, you know, fundamental basis, at least in my world, that seemed to make a very big difference in the kind of dynamics that that are formed. And that that makes trust a lot more sort of pervasive, I find.

I think that that assuming what is it I forget what it is not assuming ill will essentially or something like this if humans are basically good. That's good anywhere. Yeah, exactly. That's just good advice.

All relationships are Yeah.

Because I really have the intention to relate to people who are growth based who are committed to their growth? I can only assume that that's what we're doing that they're committing to their growth, and I'm committing to mine. And that the choices I'm going to make are going to be largely based on my growth and from, for me, I have I guess I struggle with the word Trust, because what am I trusting that they're going to do what? I trust that they're going to look inwardly? And be honest with themselves? I think maybe that trust what I'm trusting in everything else? Is it free for all? And that's life generally, right? Like, that's just life, like, you just hope that the people you're relating to our our people have, you know, real substance, and that they're really looking and sometimes we are looking, and sometimes we miss it. And that's a part of the process, right? Yeah, that's where trust comes in. For me, I trust that they're, they're doing the best that they can with who they are and what they know.

But trust is an interesting one, as I was doing research for this panel and looking into there is a relationship anarchy manifesto, the person who, Andy SRECS, I don't want to, exactly and in Oregon, who coined the term relationship anarchy, wrote a manifesto and you can find it online, just look it up. And one of the things so as I was going through, I was looking at them individually, I don't personally identify as relationship anarchists. But as I was reading the manifesto, each point that she was making really resonated with me and on trust, I think it's actually it ultimately ends up about me trusting myself, that I can, I am making the right decisions in that moment, including the people that I'm choosing to be in a relationship with. So it's like you can you can only trust people like trusting other trusting somebody else is a leap of faith. At some point, you just do it, because you choose to do it, there is no guarantees, there is no, nobody can guarantee you because the only constant is change, people change circumstances change, even people making promises, they, they don't want to break it circumstances change that they might have, they might have to. So with trust, especially in the context of this manifesto in relationship anarchy, I think is ultimately trusting in yourself, that you are choosing the right people to be around, when things come up, you will handle them in the best way that you can, and go from that. That's kind of what I take away from it.

Like feel like sometimes when you hear the word Trust, I also hear the word vulnerability, like how can I be vulnerable, in a situation that has no certainty. And to that I say, no situation has certainty. And you will hope to be in relationship with people who have a real willingness to look inwardly

when people ask me a lot, you know, how do you deal with the potential of him leaving your What if she has an affair, or like, these are questions that are not unique to our construct, they're going to be there regardless, what you really think that by not knowing where he is, means that like, he doesn't have the same temptation, as if I had all these rules for him to be back by nine o'clock, like, does it really, truly make a difference, because ultimately, at the end of the day, they will have autonomy, they will take it or they won't take it. But if I want it to be their choice to come back to me and love me the way I want to be loved, I do have to set them out, I have to let them go. So for me, my answer to you is that it doesn't make a difference. Giving someone autonomy. And you brought this back to, you know, raising children being able to let go is how you really find someone that chooses you.

And I think something that came up. I know, Wendy, you mentioned that this is in the realm of trust, tolerance ambiguity, you know, I talk a lot about in my practice, about tolerance, ambiguity and, and what that means. So ambiguity, essentially, the unknown, and we have a sense so often the opposite of tolerance, the ambiguity we're having a tolerance for ambiguity is control. So you either want to control or you have a tolerance, and understanding that you can't control things. And I think it is, it is only human to want to control our environment, you feel safe and comfortable. And I think, you know, when do you saying like having tools to be able to do that and your, your Buddhist practice, like supporting you in doing that? I think it's a practice I think, naturally, it doesn't come naturally in our natural instinct of survival, and comfort and security, and that manifests and control and like ownership, right? That's the natural way of the human brain working. So we actually have to like relearn stuff and, and have practices in place to be able to rewire ourselves, to be open and to be spacious and to be able to trust and make things happen is

really saying, and I think it ties in with vulnerability and so far as vulnerability is a practice. And one of the things is opening up to other people. And being in that wide open, kind of spacious and knowing that at any moment, something can go down. It feels

radical. Yeah, because it is kind of scary. And just because we say this came naturally to us when we were 14 doesn't mean we don't succumb to the incredible impulse and fear, to put structure around it to protect ourselves because we're human.

It's Kristin here.

So I've have only been around the world of non monogamy for a couple of years. And the first time I heard relationship anarchy was actually here at a curious Fox, social, it was on communication. And I believe a mirror, you raised your hand and identified yourself as a relationship and our kiss. And I had never heard the term before. And in the context of where I was, at that moment, trying to open up a monogamous relationship with someone, and there was lots of non consensual non monogamy going on, and lots of gaslighting, and cheating and lying and not acting with integrity. It was a terrifying term to me. I didn't know what it meant. And my initial response when you identified yourself was that person must be selfish, cold, uncaring, unfeeling. This is someone who doesn't care about other people and how they feel. And now, I completely now that I know what it is. It feels very, very, right and natural to me and to, you know, in line with everything that I believe about, not being able to control other people. And you know, how I put my friends and my lovers in the same plane, you know, how I want to go about my relationships and in the future, but I wonder, how often do you deal with that reaction? And do you not identify yourself as that to people? Like, do you let people discover it naturally, because because you say that it's such an odd term, it's not something that's in the regular vernacular. And I'm sure even within the poly community, people probably bristle and think of you as other and cold and unfeeling and, and react poorly to it. So. So I'm just curious how you guys deal with that sort of ignorance, I

broke up with someone last week over this. Yeah. And now it's become a thing for me. You know, people talk about their constructs when they're on a date, like we did on Thursdays. So my thing is, I tell them, I'm fiercely non hierarchical. And all that means is that whatever this is, I have space for it. If we continue on, and we meet each other's needs, I want I want to welcome that and have space for it. And it's not complimentary to a hierarchical, very structured, polyamorous person. So if you are hierarchical, and I am not, that could create some incompatibility. So I'm very upfront about it, like very, very clear. And FBI might need your counseling, because that's not working. So like, I'm here to tell you that I'm a little lost about this. Because the last three people that I have had relationships with romantic relationships with and different dynamics, like some more sexual some way more love and romance, aside from the person that I live with right now have all ended over this very topic. Because I have more space than they do. And I have more room emotionally, anything, I just have more flexibility in my heart. And that has nothing to do with time, but it manifests is time. I'm very, very busy. And I wear a lot of hats. I live in New York City, who is it? Right? But one of the biggest hardships that comes with this, this is like time for people. And that's not unique to me. It's a poly problem, I would say is having time for people. Oh my goodness, what was your initial question?

How do you handle it when you meet people,

I tell them, I try to be as upfront as possible without freaking them out. Or like putting too much structure in because I'm an anarchist. Like I don't want to define myself. But at the same time, I need you to know that if you want to fit me on Thursday nights, and you want me to fit a very specific box, it's not going to work and yet, no matter how much I communicate, and I am a communicator, as you can see, I think people are still because they don't necessarily understand it. And I'm usually the first person they've ever encountered that they just kind of see me as fluid and cool. And then they discover later Oh, no shit, like she really was. And I'm like, no, really I told you this. So the last three breakups I have repeated what I said on day one of I am non hierarchical, and you are hierarchical. And this is what you know. So you Maybe you do have better advice.

I would like to start by saying not all ra people have breakups. I do not, I do not begin or end relationships in that kind of release Stark fashion. I don't have breakups, I just have changes. And I don't ever really start a relationship. I just, you know, just things happen. Things just do what they do naturally, as they actually are. We're moving out of the concepts. Yeah,

I was gonna say, I tried to do that way. The problem is not everybody else does.

So that's, that's I think almost the core of your question is, how

are more about the initial reaction?

How are we perceived by others? I don't know, how I'm perceived. But you know, there are a lot more important things to know about me, then how I don't perceive you, you know, or how I'm not going to organize knowing you. There are super way more important things to know about me. And I think that I generally like to let people find that out through experience. In a situation where I might want physical intimacy, that obviously gets a little bit challenging, because please keep in mind, I'd speak of relationships very broadly. So I'm talking about like, anybody I might relate to, it's not the first thing I bring up in situations where I might want some level of physical intimacy or be looking for that, um, it's been my experience so far, just approach it by still just getting to know people has not worked out well, actually. Because one of the things that I noticed that happened when I would try to get to know someone, and they really became quite attached very quickly and referred to me as their partner. And I'm like, Well, I just don't even know you said, I'm like, heart. And I was like, look, look. It was all done in texting. It was terrible. It's horrible. But I was like, like, I don't do partner like I'm alright. Like, they're like, Yeah, I know what that means. You're using me. And I was just like, I was like, I'm just like, not not. And then I was just like, I think like, really, the underpinnings of this situation right now might have more to do with you like being disembodied, it because you're having a reaction, you're having an experience, and it's a big one, and you're not willing to be with it. That my friend is reason for me to get some space. So I'm like you. So I guess that kind of reaction does happen, but I don't usually. I don't usually say it off the bat, I don't usually make announcements about it. I usually like to characterize how I relate or use descriptive words rather than label. Refer back to that guy. Sorry. It's a thing.

Yeah. And I think I definitely wanna hear what you're saying, well, one of the distinctions that as I was doing this feature that came up was, you know, there's a lot of conversation around what is the fundamental differences between non hierarchical polyamory and relationship anarchy. And I think the thing that ultimately, the clear, the clearest thing I can get to is not separating what we say romantic relationships to other relationships. So when I hear Wendy say, like, I'm just talking about people I relate to, but I think that is the fundamental difference. It's, it's the person that she does her taxes to the doorman to, you know, the people, you know, the barista to the kid, this kid that obviously gets to say to the kid, and I was like,

No, my kids know, like, kids, no, kids, no, I'm afraid. My own kids know, like, I'm sure their friends know that there's something different. They know. Yeah.

And I think that is, yeah, that is the fundamental difference that between that sort of this idea, because it took me a while to just try to, like parse this out for myself to understand anything, the one that really sticks out is that there's like anybody that you relate to, versus the people that you're in a relationship with. There's my air quotes.

There's and also I would note that the another big difference is that in Ra, you can be sexually exclusive and monogamous is if you so if you choose to write if that's an arrangement that you've made with someone for any period of time, it's it's possible for sure. Yeah,

yeah, absolutely. I want to say I want to relate to some of the things you said about what distinguishes RA versus non hierarchical non monogamy. And yes, I agree one of one of the aspects is the notion of taking away that construct of putting certain kinds of relationships at the top and having a hierarchy of relationships right, because non hierarchical non monogamy for some people still is very hierarchical is still like I have, maybe I don't call them primary and secondary but they are sort of my, whatever lovers or partners or whatever. And then

even between the two of us you see a difference, you know, and just convert, like our conversation were like not exactly the same. Yeah, yeah. And I wouldn't call them anything.

Well, absolutely, yeah. And I think that is an interesting discourse, right about if you try to take away all of the hierarchy and try to take away the ownership model of calling people my this or my that, then you know, short of names, you're not left with a lot of other options. You have experimented

with that personally, and we ended up we, we someone I'm seeing, like, literally, you are actually saying that was good, or friends, friends is

my friends, because at the end of the day, that is at the basis of we wish one should hope.

And then sometimes they're not friends, sometimes they're people, you got a really good time.

Right? Yeah, it happens. But the other the other thing that I think is the other thing that I think is actually really important to bring up again, is to go back to what you said about politics, right. So it's not just about a style of mana of non monogamy, it's actually trying to challenge a lot of those notions of control and ownership that are at the core of monogamy. And once you start challenging that, and deconstructing that, and challenging the patriarchal basis of monogamy and when you challenge patriarchy, you'd start to see all the other systems of control in society, like capitalism, and, you know, and racism and other things that are trying to put people in hierarchies. So once you start to do that, try to bring all of that into how we relate to each other. And, you know, breaking away all of those structures of power. And first of all, recognizing that the systems of power existing any kind of relationship and then try to you know, not let that dictate the way we relate to each other and making the personal into political. I think that is a very important part of what relationship anarchy is about.

I mean, a lot of people that I spoke to have told me that, that it's not a relationship structure, but it is a belief system. Absolutely. And that you can be monogamous and have a belief system that is relationship anarchy. I think that is also a distinction that we need to talk about that it's not it's that's the best way I can explain it. You can be monogamous. You can be monogamous and still believe in relationship anarchy.

Yeah, for me. Clarify.

I think marriage aspect. Yeah. So sexually exclusive married? Not so much. Sure.

Yeah, I would concur with that. I would say sexually exclusive because again, monogamy can make sexual exclusivity. There's nothing in relationship anarchy that says one should be non exclusive. You can be exclusive OR abstinent or whatever you want. It also doesn't talk about the orientation it talks about the philosophy so yeah, you guys

are really married for the taxes.

Right? I was just gonna say you're you're married on paper, but doesn't mean anything. I mean, this really goes to how are you internalizing labels? How are you in exactly marriage? What do they mean to you to go back to her original question? Totally laid it down. Like

she was like, a person. Yeah, really? I mean, I didn't know. I've heard that before. So it's not the first time I come across that. And I think it sounds like you. It sounds like you, you came across that also, right? It's yeah. And the you know, the truth is, there are a lot of assholes out there, right. And sometimes that kind of, you know, Freedom type of philosophy can can give one a lot of sort of, you know, excuses in a way right?

That's really reserved about using it for the label aspect because I don't feel like it fully contains the quality of my being in relationships. How could it I do use it very loosely and I don't I mean, what What if one day I'm not ra anymore? What if one day like something something else seems more real. I'd like to have room for that and that's that's the basic point like so I don't make this like I don't put it on the forefront like, but it does come up and then I know when I'm gonna bring it up, that they're gonna have to be sitting down and we're gonna like some tea because like this, this actually happened today at work. They're like what you're doing today and yeah, a panel about totally monogamous people working in a college setting. I'm like, Well, you knows about non monogamy? What's that? Well, you know, it's like when people decide what their relationships know that sounds intriguing. And then they're like, Well, I'm like specifically we're talking about Ra. You know what's ra relationship anarchy?

And have conversation? Oh, this is where the

conversation begins. So I use this sparingly.

Three days ago, my coworker asked me when I told her, the Vex, I was like, it's time. She asked me if I if I did threesomes, do you? That was that was literally a response. That's how much people understand what you're saying. So I was like, Look, there's a difference between asking about my kink life and my fetish isn't sexual desires versus who I date and how I like to date you basically went to do you do anal? And then she was like, No, I would never ask that. Like, there's nothing wrong with eight or your people have no idea what that word is. And they get really freaked out about it. And I get one of two responses besides that weird one was the one they don't believe me. Which is what happened last three guys. They don't believe me. I'm monogamous. Yeah. They don't believe what I believe they don't they want they'll they'll impose whatever they think you mean, and what they want, which is like, Well, eventually, you'll be with me for it. You know, they project what they want. That's the first one or the second one. They convinced me to be committed. Like they assume that I'm non committal. I've been with a partner for 10 years. I love him very much. He's my life, like my person. And they put on all of that crap, that I'm non committal that I'm afraid of commitment. You have no idea, you have no idea. Because he's not with me. And he doesn't own me that I don't commit to people. So those are the two responses. That's

really important. But I'm sure there's a lot of questions. Yeah.

Listen, go on forever. But I do want to ask Yes, good. Is it

okay? If I don't ask a question? It's okay, if I give a little reflection, and then ask for feedback. Okay, so my journey with relationships has been framed by being a career sex worker. So it's really interesting about being a sex worker, because you're kind of practicing ra within a container. That's financial. But the thing that's really interesting is my impetus was never financial. My impetus was always freedom oriented. Because people my main career was being a stripper. And so I got to actually be myself and I got to be myself more in the strip club in those relationships, then it was amazing. And then the other thing is that my journey with labels was very interesting. I was dating this person, it was like, one of the only times in my life had had a monogamous relationship. And we were in the process of changing our relationship. And I was just seeing this new guy, and he's like, why are you with someone that's so insecure, I'm like, What are you talking about? He's like, you're polyamorous. And I was like, I'm what I didn't even know, I was just living that way. And what I find with the labels is that they're like a little portal. And that gives you that moment where you're like, that release, and that relaxation of being so odd for most of your life. And then 26 years old, getting a label that you're like, holy shit, I'm something, you know, that's not just like a freak, you know, then so I had, what I'd spent most of my life doing up until recently, was finding containers, where I would know that the there was a context, the relationship with the person couldn't control me. And I would have the circumstance that you had, where someone would, I would think that it was way it was was a passing phase, or I would grow out of it. And then like, six months into the relationship, be like, holy crap, you're really this way. And then they tried to change you and try to get you to be different. And then you go through that whole thing. But one of the things that's most interesting, because I've had relationships that are going on almost 20 years now. And the relationships have deeply changed. Like, by one person's perspective, we're not even together anymore. But what I've discovered is that that particular person, I have to be committed to, if I break up with this person, my whole life falls apart. But as long as in my heart, I know that commitment is so meaningful and deep and I maintain that commitment every day to that person because of the difference they literally saved my life like I love them to death then my life is good and my life is better. So I based the way I structure my relationships on the depth and the meaning and the quality of that commitment to that person. And the other thing I was gonna say is I do find that it's really important to be open and be like but I find that sometimes people that you love need a really tight container and sometimes they need you to like be really tough on them and provide lots of their the dominatrix like this mistress of desire way of loving somebody where you have I call it having a listen fucker conversation. And there are people that I know that whose lives I've literally saved because I've been like no, you We're not going away get away with letting me like not love you. And that's when I talk about I call it radical non negotiable. non negotiable unconditional love. It's like I love you so much. There's nothing you can do about that.

It's great. Thank you for sharing it.

Was there a question in there? No, I use a lot of information. Yeah, I can I can I can relate to the sex worker thing. Actually, I was a proton for quite a while. I've worked Oh, forget it, we're gonna leave what I do out now. Because this conflict of interest? Well, forget it, you know, mental health. I work in mental health now. But that's largely my background, but I have worked as a predominance exactly the same thing. And, um, and those were very real relationships, you know, holding the same guy once a week as he cries in your arms. That's a real relationship. And I can say, actually, in mental health, the relationships that I have with the people that I work with is they're very real. They're their own relationships, there are boundaries in place, there are boundaries that ultimately make this the sessions function in both scenarios. In the same way that there are boundaries in place for my children. But but they're they're still very, very much real. Yeah.

I think again, with that, again, this is all my research is. I think the why anarchy, the word anarchy hits people is because we're just misinformed. I was misinformed for sure. And we think that, you know, anarchy means chaos. And it actually doesn't think he doesn't mean lack of structure. I think he doesn't mean no boundaries. It's not committed. It doesn't mean uncommitted just

means it's self governance.

Right. Right. Right. Yeah. So I think it's, it's, you know, I think people think that, you know, like you saying, having these relationships with boundaries isn't not out of line with having a relationship. Anarchists mindset,

right? It's boundaries, not rules, right?

For sure. Yeah. Yeah,

I want to maybe add to that a little bit, also relate to what you were saying. Because what I've heard you say is essentially, you see the relationship dynamic, as what defines the relationship. And I totally agree with that. And I think that is, to me, also one of the biggest differences between relationship anarchy, and normative relationships, let's call them where those tend to have types and categories. And that's where the labels come into play. Right? So if we are partners, or, you know, God forbid, friends with benefits, or one of those labels, that, then we come to the relationship with a set of expectations that are based on that

category. It's an internalized label.

Yeah. And so we say, This is what a married couple does, right. And usually, of course, our interpretation will be different than I'll get us into trouble. But the point is that, you know, instead of trying to, like find ourselves within the relationship and define it, and I think you come up with the you came up with the notion of relationship by design, and to me, that's what relation panic is all about is not taking that sort of, you know, super impose structure and say, you know, this is what creates the expectation. I

mean, we don't design

it, but we design it ourselves. Right. And again, it goes back to freedom so that the freedom from those externally imposed structures is what it's about. Yeah, yeah.

I would add to that we design it ourselves, with the realization that it could change at any one.

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, for sure.

Yeah. Interesting. I was introduced to our relationship anarchy, the term itself by someone who actually told me that he had a girlfriend he sleeps with every day. So it kind of sounded yaki call. But that's not the point. The point is that I think it's a very interesting term. And as coming from the 60s, etc. When we use anarchy, we don't use it lightly. It's actually not just an individual choice. It's a movement. It's a political movement. Yes, there are too many issues related first is, as someone says, not very palatable. It's not very marketable to others, you know, I do just what I want. So where is the organizing principle? Is it just my will and my self governance, but what is actually governing my self governance? So what's the value? One, one thing is what's the value added to polyamory? Or two actually, has not been asked but to non conventional or unconventional, ethical, consensual non monogamy. So I think that we have a big challenge not to Just in communication in the term itself for the label, but in defining what, what's the politics of it, I love the term myself an artist, I feel now in our case for me, it's viable, radical, anti centralization, you know, patriarchy, etc. But how do you move from that to the relationship? reom? And as I have heard so far, I'm sorry, that to be a little disappointed, because it's more like I did I did I did it story driven. And actually, the idea is to create a movement like polyamory. Why would you want to? So it's just questions that are free

as well.

Yeah, I'm just trying to get between the big picture politics, which is, you know, the intellectual part, and then how do we translate that in our day to day lives, but being true to the term Iraqi status? Okay.

So I think you actually mentioned a key word there as part of that, which is consent, right. And people like to talk about consensual non non monogamy. But a lot of times, that means completely different things that actually translate to control rather than consent. I think if if we go back to that notion of building the relationship, not based on a preconceived notion of what a relationship of type A needs to look like. And we talk about these notions of designing them, the design is done with, you know, looking for consent, as the guiding principle, right. And that can be quite radical, right? Because we're not talking about sex, necessarily, right. When you're, and I think that's something you brought up in some of your talks as well. Think about how people treat food in most cultures, right? It's completely coercive, right? And most of our notion of how we relate to intimates, people around our lives is tend to be very coercive. So just the notion of moving to a, you know, a place where we negotiate concert consent constantly, and everything that we do, I think, is quite radical as as a way of going beyond the self. And to me, that's, that's another key principle.

I sense a potential question in there, too. Whether or not it was like implied,

or I think there was an actual specific question regarding. Yeah, I think there was a specific question regarding relationship anarchy as a movement and anarchy broadly as a movement. And then how does it sync up with I guess the idea was, how does relationship anarchy sync up with the notion of anarchy as a movement? Yeah. And it brings up the question of should riba movement?

And also, what kind of value does that add to the already, you know, World of polyamory? I heard that was the other question on top of that, yeah. Go ahead, go for it. I'll add that I'll address the second one. Because that's the one that I really got excited about. If it's all about I, I'd like to kind of flip that and say, it's about choice, rather than a self absorbed kind of dynamic, which that could easily. Again, that's not unique to polyamory, or monogamy or NAMA, it's just you as a person, right? Whether or not you consider other people I don't think has anything to do with anarchy. That's just your construct as a person. That's just how you are. But yeah, if one of the foundation or you know, Defining Principles of anarchy is autonomy, there is a level of AI and choice involved, and what kind of value does it actually bring to a relationship? And to that, I mean, I can only answer for myself, and that is that I have the freedom to truly love radically because it's my choice. So to make this really simple, I'm going to make an example out of it. I've just been a real example. I don't have to go home tonight. I don't have to. In fact, if I want to spend the night somewhere I will. But I go home because I love him. And I want to. And there's nothing more radical about that. There's nothing that really communicates love more than having choice. So for me, autonomy is the space to radically love because it's my choice to not because it was inflicted on me by culture. So it's not self absorbed as much as it is my choice to actually give in a way that really helps me thrive. And when it's my choice, and I'm thriving, you can thrive in that love because it's not forced. That's how I would just put slant answer that

my answer is ra should not be for everyone. It's not for everyone, it does not need to be widespread. And it does not need to be a movement. There are lots of other ways to do anarchy that will work and make sense for you or there are lots of other ways to resist the way the larger society is organized that don't work for you Ra is not the only way to do it. So I would definitely say that it could be detrimental. I think I was saying this before we came in here, it could be detrimental for someone to engage in relationship as I do, without the right tools to do so, or without the aptitude to do so or the you know, certain personality traits and various other things to do. So like it could be detrimental. And I don't think it's a good idea. Actually, I think there are lots of other ways to push back against the powers that be and to deconstruct the system, so to speak. And NRA is not the only way to do it, I would say to that end, that power dynamics are at play in all of our relationships. And there is value in addressing them in your relationship, particularly as a woman, particularly as a person of color, particularly as a queer person who's relating in the world, those power dynamics should always, always always be addressed, no matter how you design your relationship.

And I think that kind of goes back to to your question about the political or social movement. Yeah, that is anarchism. Right? And it's just bringing anarchism into the realm of relationships. But as a social movement, it's, it's really just anarchism. And I think anarchism is, is very alive, very much alive. And well, these days as a political movement. I like what you said about radical love, I think that kind of gives us a certain glue, to hold our, our society in a way that's different than the current sort of political structures that are in place. And in that sense, is very much relating to that. Sure. Thank you.

So there's been a mention of rules and boundaries as well, if you could help me understand the difference? And is it is it more about the way in which you come to agree on them? Or? Or is there actually some difference? And are those helpful terms discussing this?

Well, I'll try. I don't know, it's, it's, it's a difficult one to answer because there is sort of like this kind of gray area, but it's, it's clear, in my mind, when I think about it, the boundaries are very much individual. So there are things that can and cannot be done to me, versus things that you can or cannot do. So. And they have to do with defining, you know, actually the boundary between the self and the other. It's, it's the thing. So it's, it's about much more than, you know, the way that we might do things, you know, it's it's just and this is where he gets fuzzy, right? It's kind of hard to define what makes good boundaries, how does one talk about personal boundaries,

married have rules that you didn't enjoy and boundaries that work for

you. So yeah, I think this is very, very different than rules. In my mind, this is what I'm trying to say sort of rules or just very external structures that are trying to sort of define

example, like in your life, what might be easier to understand that

what creates a good boundary, a very simple example would be something like, you know, I will not be communicated in an emotionally abusive way or a verbal abusive way, for instance, right. Things that are very clear about this is the way that I need to be treated right with respect with you know, kindness, mindfulness, I nee. Yeah, it's about it. But it's not about my needs. Because it's not about all of my needs. It's more about where I define the separation between a healthy sense of self and the people around the right. Things that will and will not sort of agree to and tolerate in the way that I'm being treated in the way that I interact with other people that have nothing to do with the way that you are interacting with other people in your life, right things that are outside of the realm of us interacting with each other. That's where it has nothing to do with boundaries. So to answer your question, that's where I see the distinction. where the other things is where people talk about rules and agreements and so on.

feel like you've set something on your mind. I want to know what it is.

I'm sorry, I'm trying to understand the question.

I think the question is what are the fundamental differences between rules and boundaries?

I heard roles. That's yeah. Rules, rules and boundaries. You know what I think I'm a bit cynical about the way that people use boundaries. Sometimes it's often used as, that's my boundary is another way of saying, I'm really uncomfortable with this. And just being uncomfortable is not always a problem. It's okay to be uncomfortable and to experience discomfort. Yeah, I feel like we kind of abused that word sometimes. I'm actually really conservative about Colin boundaries. So, yeah, yeah, do whatever the hell you want to do, man. It's a little different. When I live in a space with someone though, that starts to call up like, Okay, we've gotta, we gotta yell organized here. We've got to create a life that works for us. And still, that can always change. If Yeah, it just it's very situation dependent with me. Boundaries are basically, you know, don't touch me when I'm sleeping. Like sexually, like, fucking boundary. That's, you know, that yeah, that's a pretty reasonable boundary, very neutral boundary, and it's something you come in with, for me, it can, it's often something I'll come in with. It's not something I created just because I'm fucking uncomfortable. And sometimes it is something I created, because I'm uncomfortable, but like, you know, I think it's very, very situation dependent. I I'm cautious about saying any one certain thing. I like to I like to relate it to BDSM. Actually, my boundaries are my hard limits. Like my boundaries or my hard limits, it's quite similar, but also boundaries can often change.

I would like a really classic example of a boundary is like it for for polyamorous people or non monogamous people is like, fluid, like exchanging fluid and sex. That's could be a hard, hard limitation, right? And, like, yeah, I identify as as an anarchist. But if I'm dating someone that has that strong like, boundary for them, of course, I'm going to take that into consideration, because those kinds of if we can call them rules, or we can call them boundaries, but ultimately, if something I'm doing impacts another human being, then I'm going to acknowledge it. I'm glad you brought the word, the word like the word rules versus boundaries, it's such a great question. And to answer that, I don't know that the two words are going to really help us classify as much as it is we we strive for autonomy and choice, because we want the freedom to love. And that also comes with a lot of communication around is what I'm doing going to be helpful and healthy to the people that I love. And if not, are there things that I can choose actively to to make other people thrive around me, and that can be called agreements, we can call those boundaries. We like to avoid the word rule because it implies negativity. You know, I don't know if that helps.

I think I always reserve the right to like decline as well. Like, if someone's like, this is a boundary for me, or this is a rule or however you whatever however you like to phrase it and it doesn't feel right for me, it like it changes things in a way that doesn't make sense to me, I can decline and it may not be a forever decline, I might just be like a decline. I'm gonna think about that and like see what it really feels like and I do have a tendency to like a lot of space and to enjoy solitude for that very reason because it gives me the space to really feel things out and to find out if their boundary or hard limit or whatever you want to call it. Makes sense to me if it's if it's sound if it feels right in my gut, and that's a really intuitive thing for me to

just want to go back to your example because it's such a great one to to kind of clarify maybe the distinction, right. I don't have penetrative sex with others without a condom. That would be a boundary. You will not have penetrative sex with other people without a condom is rule. Yeah, because it's and that's the difference. Right? Yeah. Yeah. And as an honor to do impact each other they do, but as an anarchist, I don't believe that I have any rights to can you make a request? I can make any request, but I don't I wouldn't even make that request of you. I would rather know about it right, if you decide to do that, yeah. But I believe that, you know, my first responsibility is for myself, right? So I'd much rather get tested every three months, right and find out about things early, rather than trying to control all of my partners, and my partners, partners and trying to get to a point where I'll be, quote unquote, safe, right. And that goes back to that notion of control.

Romantic centric, I just want to say

but you do find that a lot in polyamorous circles, right? It's like, I want to know exactly when, like, I want to control the whole molecule. And that's how we're all going to be safe. And that takes you right back to monogamy. I

don't think there's anything necessarily negative about the desire to control that honestly. Like, like, I think I don't want us to necessarily be super anti the other side. Like, if you have a desire to be with partners, who are always wearing condoms or not, like, I actually think that that's like you mentioned anarchy is not for everybody. So I wouldn't necessarily say that's control. It's also health, you know what I mean? So there's two sides of the coin. Sure.

Yeah. Um, before, I want to add just the rules and boundaries part. One of the things again, if you research, relationship anarchy, find your manifesto one, there's one of the things that mentioned this idea of finding your core belief system, your core values. So I think that might be a different way of looking at it, rather than looking at rules and boundaries is what the manifesto suggests is that you found your core values and that those are your those are your Northstar, like you align your decisions, your your, your whatever your interactions, according this Northstar that you decide for yourself, which is your value system. And the way that works out is a combination of, you know, the boundaries, rules, whatever you want to call it. But that's just how you get there. I think what sort of dictates it is the Northstar that you choose for yourself. And I think if you communicate that to your partners, this is my about value system. These are the values I live by, I think the boundaries, rules agreements will take care of themselves in ongoing, healthy, intentional communication. I don't know if that aligns with what you guys believe. Yeah,

I would concur. I think boundaries are something that one constantly negotiates and redefines for oneself, it's part of a healthy, relating rules, to me is something that static that one tries to put in place to make

it made, right there often already

may not based on you meeting and figuring it out. It's like, my experience told me this. So this is the hard stop

and rules, often they're already made, they come from, you know, the societal sort of norms and dictates kind of like a turn off

boundaries also don't have to be necessarily verbalized in such a way. So when you're bringing the the example, a lot of times your boundaries could be actually enforced by behavior, right? One can sort of act in certain ways that create boundaries between the self and the other. Right, and puts up certain space for a reason. Yeah,

yeah. I mean, the last question, when we're going to wrap up, we have three, let's do quick, can we have all the three questions, and we'll try to address them as well as we can, and then we'll wrap up and we're over to

okay, this is very broad. But and I'll use partners as a shorthand for people that you're intimately involved with, so to speak. It's a very broad question. So you can answer quickly, but without there being rules, necessarily, but there can be things that make partners very uncomfortable and possibly emotionally hurt. How do you show consideration and care for their feelings without it being that you're adjusting your behavior or limiting your behavior? How do you still show compassion for your other partners?

Great, well hold that. Can we have all the three questions and see if we can answer them? And alas, no,

no, was there another?

So yeah, I mean, so Concetta? I mean, what you said resonated throughout. And I thought sounds like I mean, like I was raised as a kind of a rule follower. And I was just curious, whether you like experience in your life, like, a lot of clashes with authority figures in school, whether you still do if you have worked that situation is you know, is that is that like universal for your life? Or is it in relation to this just like, How is life with all the rebelliousness into anarchy? You know,

it's a good question, because we go back to the idea that this is relationship anarchy means all of relationships, not just your romantic relationships, right? So if that's your attitude to all relationships, that is colleagues that is, you know, people that you know, people that you interact with day to day, so how's that working out for you guys? Third question, we have a third question. Okay, we're gonna do so how do you show up? How do you show compassion? When there are no structures? Suggest that and then and then how is how is relationship anarchy in general? Working out for you guys? Yeah and life.

Passion compassion is a practice. It's a daily practice. I first it starts with me, gentleness starts here in me and how I work with my own content and material. And then and then it ideally radiates outward into my relationships more pragmatically. So someone approaches me and says, I doesn't usually come at, you know, when these things happen, they don't usually they're not so civilized. So you know, someone's having a blowout, you know, and they're like, I don't know, what's what's coming. You do this, like, every day, you get to hear people's stuff. Give me an example of like a relational blowout, so I can give an example of addressing it

make one is this is not what we agreed to. This is not what a

partner isn't. This is not what we agreed to say there was some some former agreement. You know, and I'm probably upset because I'm not going to be super therapeutic right now. Um, you know, okay, let's take some space, I see that you're hurting, and I'm hurting? Can we take some space and come back to this? Because I really want to respond to you. For from, from the the deepest, most compassionate place in me, that's usually where I start, you can attest to that. I start with space. And then I come back. After having really sat with what the person said, I try, I generally try to see if there's any truth in what they said. And what is actually true. For me and for them also, and sometimes my truth and their truth aren't in aren't aligning and, and then I try to re approach it. And I say, this is I sat with this, and this is what I'm seeing, what are you seeing? And then it just becomes this process of working things out. And having a talk about the underlying emotions, as well as you know, the more practical aspects of things, but it's a process. Yeah, it's ongoing. Yeah.

Yeah. I wonder if you just repeat that that wording one more time? How do you show compassion towards the person you're with? Without? What was the

will? Like, if they're uncomfortable or feel emotionally like something? You're not gonna set like an actionable restriction on yourself? How do you still show compassion? Right?

Yeah, yeah, that's a it's an excellent, ya know, I really liked this question because it it. Again, it addresses something that in monogamy is sort of assumed that one is responsible for one's partner's emotions, right, and especially those difficult emotions that that we typically put in the umbrella of jealousy and things like that. And that is like, the worst thing that can happen is you can make your partner jealous and, and all the constructs around that. One, once you try to go away from that, right, and see yourself as not being responsible for somebody else's emotions, although you might be the cause of some of those emotions you might have contributed to it, then there's a lot more space to kind of consider, right? First of all, to be compassionate, just like you said, and you mentioned that. So compassion is first of all, I think, again, is one of those bases for healthy relationship, just like trust, just like the assumption of goodwill. And sometimes I will change my actions, right. But the idea is to do that from again, from a place of trying to discern what what you were just saying, right? Which is where do I see my responsibility? Right for something Did I did I actually act against my own sort of belief system and my own values of what good relationship should be like we're good relating should be like, right? Did I basically, was I acting like an asshole, right? And that takes some some time and space like you were saying to sort of figure that out. In that is separate from your emotions and feelings of hurt. So it's sort of moving away from this assumption that there is some sort of objective truth and objective way that's, you know, we're all just trying to sort of find into a much more subjective way of seeing things and really trying to see the other in their perspective

really brings the question how we do emotional labor broadly? Yeah, it's a bigger conversation. Yeah. Yeah. Unfortunately, we

had to have to wrap up. Does anybody want to address the last question of like, how's it working out for you and your other relationships and relationships? Yes

to you?

Laura, it was Yeah. Okay. So yeah, I grew up in Japan. And I make this really, really fast, we could talk afterwards. Japan is all about rules and tradition, not about freewill, or your individuality. It's all about who you are in the structure of tradition and culture, right? I fought against that my whole life, nine kids Hierarch relationship fought against that, too. I do have an abusive childhood. And so I was constantly punished for having choice and freedoms. So yes, that's why I'm here. What I find always is that strong authority without any reason, and just for the sake of authority, I don't thrive. And a lot of people don't thrive in that a lot of people how I survive with this now, because we live in a hierarchical world. And I'm fiercely non hierarchical. How I survive in this is I try if I'm in a space, in a work in a contract, that doesn't give me that I can't like, and I have to keep that job or relationship, I need to keep it alive and flourishing, then I need to give myself some radical autonomy somewhere else and a huge amount of self care. That is how I've learned to treat myself in this way, if I'm on a contract, and musical theater is incredibly hierarchical, and sometimes very abusive, and it's a culture of bullying. If that's the case, then I need to make sure that I'm making work that no one tells me what to do and how to make it and I get to do it on my terms how I want to work with the people I want, as long as I'm satisfying it equally somewhere else, it doesn't create a seesaw effect in my life. If I'm not nurturing autonomy somewhere else, and then I'm dealing with it, then I just feel oppressed. And then I react.

We do have to wrap up regretfully, this conversation can go on forever. But we want to sort of wrap it up. But we don't have to stop. We're going to be here for another we have the space till 10 o'clock, we're going to be here chatting. Before I before I go, there are a few thank yous that I want to say. I want to say thank you to Jackie, my collaborator who make helps me make this happen. I want to say thank you to Laura and my assistant, who also makes this happen. I want to give a huge thank you to Thomas who is recording this and is going to edit it and make it into a podcast. And I also want to pass it back to Jackie, just to remind you guys about Patreon. We do need your support. There's a lot of people here they're putting their best in,

you're just as Fe mentioned, just because the event is over doesn't mean the conversation has to be. And so we invite you to follow us on all of the platforms that exist on Instagram On Facebook, we now have our podcast on Spotify, and an apple. So in all the places you can get it and share this share this dialogue in this conversation. And we really encourage you to go onto Patreon. Patreon is P A T E O E R O N Thank you Patreon. We are curious foxes. If you have enjoyed this conversation, if you want more of this if there are more people who you think needs to hear this and be a part of it. If you want to weigh in on the topics that we do if you want to have some swag and wear some things that show that you are curious and your fox then go on to Patreon and support.

Thank you Jackie and a huge thank you to my panelists who without them, this wouldn't happen

thank you. Thank you. And thank you to all for coming and stay curious. I'm curious, curious, curious. Stay curious.

Still Curios?