A framework where no relationship is ranked above another by default. Romantic, sexual, platonic, and caregiving relationships are all valid on their own terms, with commitments designed by the people in them rather than inherited from cultural scripts.
Also known as RA, Relationship anarchist.
What relationship anarchy actually covers
The term was coined by Swedish writer and activist Andie Nordgren in a 2006 pamphlet, Relationsanarki i 8 punkter (Relationship Anarchy in 8 Points). The English translation landed on Tumblr in 2012 and has been circulating ever since.
The core principles Nordgren laid out: love is abundant and loving one person doesn't deplete what you can give another; don't rank relationships and cherish each one for what it is, not where it sits in a hierarchy; one person doesn't need to be named your "primary" for the relationship to be real; organize relationships around desire to meet and explore each other, not around duties, demands, and disappointment when those aren't met; design your own commitments and don't inherit them from what society says a relationship of a given shape "should" include.
The radical move is that last one. Most frameworks for thinking about relationships tell you that if X, then Y. If you're romantic partners, then you should be sexually exclusive. If you're married, then you should cohabit. If you're best friends, then you shouldn't share finances. RA rejects the if/then. You negotiate each commitment individually with each person. Shared finances with a close friend? Fine. Separate homes with a romantic partner? Fine. The shape of the relationship follows the needs, not the other way around.
RA is distinct from non-hierarchical polyamory, even though they overlap. Non-hierarchical poly removes the ranking inside romantic relationships (no primary, no secondary). RA goes one step further and removes the ranking between romantic and non-romantic relationships. A deep friendship can be as central as a romance. It often is. RA calls the default assumption that romance automatically trumps friendship amatonormativity, and rejects it.
Wikipedia notes that RA is "commonly, but not always, non-monogamous." The framework doesn't require multiple partners. Some relationship anarchists practice effectively monogamous romantic lives because that's what fits. The point isn't how many partners. It's the refusal to accept the default script.
Where people get it wrong
RA isn't "no commitment." Nordgren's manifesto is explicit about this: "Relationship anarchy is not about never committing to anything. It's about designing your own commitments with the people around you." The commitments are opt-in rather than inherited. That's a different thing from absent.
RA isn't a fancy word for "casual." Relationship anarchists can and do build life-long entanglements, raise kids, buy houses together. They just don't assume those things come as a package because they're romantically involved.
RA isn't the same as non-hierarchical polyamory. Non-hierarchical poly still privileges romantic relationships as a category. RA doesn't. A friend can be your most important person. A romantic partner can be peripheral. Both are equally legible.
RA isn't "anti-monogamy." Some relationship anarchists are functionally monogamous by current choice. The framework is about where structure comes from (designed vs inherited), not about partner count.
Related terms you'll see
- Non-hierarchical polyamory
Shares RA's rejection of primary/secondary ranking within romantic relationships, but usually keeps romantic relationships as their own distinct category.
- Amatonormativity
The cultural assumption that long-term romantic-sexual partnership is the most valid form of relationship. RA rejects this directly.
- Mononormativity
The cultural assumption that monogamy is the default and all other structures are deviations. RA rejects this too.
- Ethical non-monogamy
The umbrella term RA often sits inside, though RA's philosophical scope goes beyond ENM.
- Solo polyamory
Overlapping but not identical. Solo poly people often keep romantic relationships as their primary category; many relationship anarchists do not.
Where to go next
If you want to read Nordgren directly, the 2006 / 2012 manifesto is freely available and short, about fifteen minutes. Mariia Karhu's 2023 Manifesto for Relationship Anarchy 2.0 extends the original into structural critique and is the most serious recent addition to the canon. If you're unsure whether RA is for you, the test isn't whether you want multiple partners. It's whether you want to design every commitment in your life yourself, from first principles, with each person. That's a lot of work. It's also the point.
Frequently asked questions
Who coined the term relationship anarchy?
Swedish writer and activist Andie Nordgren, in a 2006 pamphlet titled 'Relationsanarki i 8 punkter' (Relationship Anarchy in 8 Points). The English translation appeared on Tumblr in 2012 as 'The short instructional manifesto for relationship anarchy.'
Is relationship anarchy the same as polyamory?
No. Polyamory is about multiple romantic relationships. Relationship anarchy is about rejecting the cultural assumption that romantic relationships are inherently more important than other kinds. Many relationship anarchists are non-monogamous, but the framework doesn't require it.
Does relationship anarchy mean no rules or no commitment?
No. Nordgren's manifesto is explicit that relationship anarchy is not about avoiding commitment. It's about designing commitments from scratch rather than inheriting them from cultural scripts. The commitments are opt-in rather than assumed.
How is relationship anarchy different from non-hierarchical polyamory?
Non-hierarchical polyamory removes ranking within romantic relationships (no primary partner). Relationship anarchy goes further by removing the ranking between romantic and non-romantic relationships entirely. A close friend can be as central as a romantic partner.