Hierarchy and Cohabitation

[@denmarkdoesntexist]

Kale, just here to say that you are amazing! Even though i don't fully commit to relationship anarchy, you taught me so much about how i can feel, that certain feelings are okay and i don't need to isolate myself or repress anything. Relationship anarchy sure taught me a lot and i hope it keeps doing so. Keep up the great work!

[@itsafronique]

Watched this whole series thank you so much very informative and a great way to get introduced to relationship anarchy in an easy to grasp way that also allowed me to pause and think.

[@RelationshipAnarchy]

This is really nice to hear, I'm so glad you enjoyed them and got something out of watching them.

[@Unethrorpe]

I think an elegant solution to the problem of cohabitation creating unintentional hierarchies is to avoid living with exactly one other adult. I live in a house with three others, and that really eliminates much of the slippery slope posed by pairing off and cohabitating with one other person. I do think that Relationship Anarchy and marriage are mutually exclusive ideas. Marriage creates a legal label, which I see as an even more potent version of a purely social label, which I already reject outright.

[@eliezermorse6728]

I'm attracted to this idea. I don't think I'd ever want to live with just one other partner, even if we had separate bedrooms. I could only seeing myself doing it in a commune situation and still having separate bedrooms. Is that kind of what you mean? Or are all of the people partners that you live with?

[@Unethrorpe]

@@eliezermorse6728 Regarding your first question: yes, that is kind of what I mean. I'd hardly call my living situation a commune, but it is, for the most part, equitable. Your second question's going to be a bit trickier to address, as I'm already running up against slight misunderstanding. I don't use the term partner. I threw that one on the same pyre that 'girlfriend', 'lover', 'husband', etc. went onto. That's one of those 'social labels' I was referring to in my original comment. I think it poses roughly the same problems that the other labels do (e.g. increases in entitlement, reductions in empowerment and social mobility). I may be mistaken, but I intuit that the essence of the question is whether I regularly have sex with those three people. The answer to that is no, I do not.

[@eliezermorse6728]

@@Unethrorpe okay, thank you! Yeah, I realized my mistake after I posted it. I guess by "partner" i meant anything in a romantic capacity, not necessarily anything erotic.

[@hitealwomanhere8712]

There's a term called living apart together also known as LAT

[@qwertyacire]

Hi Kale, love the videos!! Any chance you could put together a video on how relationship anarchy would work with illness or disabilty?

[@RelationshipAnarchy]

Wow, how am I just seeing this comment now? This would be a great video. I've actually really stepped back from these videos because I've been dealing with my own chronic illness for years, and was getting pulled in too many directions. If I start making them again, this will be a huge part of the content.

[@Ed-tc2pg]

Marriage is a bad deal. If it's healthy you can live as a couple and if it's unhealthy you can leave each other and quickly move on. A legal marriage makes moving on a lengthy, expensive, and emotional ordeal.

[@AndreiGonzalesIturri]

Why do you call that an unintentional hierarchy? because of the legal things that had been created by society and by you? but then when you choose something it means you are aware of those factors, then it is Intentional, isn't it? Can someone clarify this to me? Thank you :)

[@TheQuietestOnesInTheRoom]

Yay for tax benefits! Good Video!

[@motoboxg457]

Except those other relationships obviously ARE less important. Once you make the decision to marry or move in with someone, for the reasons described, you are choosing that person over the other people and are thus introducing a relationship hierarchy.

[@wrightsright]

What??? If you simply move in with someone, you're just changing your boundaries to be physically closer. You're not changing boundaries with anyone else. Simply living in the same space with someone doesn't take anything away from a relationship with anyone else. Unless two ppl wanna move in with you and you only want one, you just don't consent to having that third person or to have that person over the other, and they have to respect that. Marriage can be just for the government benefits but you have an understanding that just because you're in that contract together doesn't mean they're more important to you than anyone else. Does having a loan with someone mean they're better than other ppl to you and therefore you're creating a hierarchy?

[@motoboxg457]

@@wrightsright LoL Comparing a romantic relationship to a bank loan really says it all about the validity of your argument. When you decide to move in with someone or marry someone you are choosing to give them a slew of benefits and privileges that others don't and cannot get. Tax benefits is one, but there are obviously so many more like admitting privileges if you're in the ICU, social status, the day to day closeness etc. You keep telling yourself what you want, but I hope you're not manipulating other people into believing that you're treating them equally.

[@LpSC2online]

@@motoboxg457 Treating everybody equally is a hierachy in itself... Equality of outcome is not desireable for relationships (whatever they are) at all.