Consensual Nonmonogamies Focused on Individuals

This post is Part I of a series untangling types of consensual nonmonagamies (CNMs) and helping to identify the huge differences between some of the ways people practice CNM in the United States today. This post explores relationships that are focused on individuals.

There is considerable confusion about CNM among members of the general public and ongoing disagreements about definitions and labels among those who practice its various forms. In an attempt to help people understand this relationship style, some of my previous posts have defined polyamory, identified the primary types of CNM practiced in the United States today, distinguished between polyamory and polygamy, explained relationship anarchy and polyaffective relationships, explored types of commitment in CNM relationships, and discussed the reasons that CNM is a form of relationship orientation for some people and a lifestyle or choice for others.

The language of “consensual nonmonogamies” is problematic for a variety of reasons,:

1. defining itself in opposition by what it is, which reinforces mononormativity,
2. sounding defensive in its emphasis on consensual or ethical, and
3. lumping very different kinds of relationships under a single heading.

It is that last pitfall—the great differences between types of nonmonogamy, which makes the singular word misleading or inaccurate—that this series of blog posts attempts to untangle. Among those many differences, three distinct categories are most relevant to this series:

1. those that focus on the individual moving through their own life with the relationship following as needed,
2. those that concentrate on couples as the core of the experience, and
3. those that build on the group as the center of the relationship.

Some people are deeply oriented toward their relationship structure and will never be comfortable changing it, while others are more fluid and might prefer several different kinds of relationships across their lives or depending on their current partners. These are not stages or exclusive categories—one relationship might transition through different categories across its lifespan or exist in more than one category simultaneously depending on how people structure their lives and boundaries.

Individuals

In the (recent) past, many mainstream folks have viewed people who remain single as somehow malfunctioning, either because they “can’t find” a relationship and so must be undesirable in some way, or because they “can’t commit” and so must be immature or selfish. While it is true that some single people are lonely folks who would much prefer to be partnered, others are thrilled to be living their solo lives.

In sharp contrast to these negative assumptions about those who remain unpartnered, recent research findings indicate that single people can be both fully functional and quite happy with their lives (Kislev, 2019). Being single does not have to mean being lonely, or even living without sex for those who want it. Instead, it is becoming abundantly clear that many single people (especially single women) relish their freedom and the flexibility their lives have without partners who expect to share their finances, living spaces, or schedules. Singleness can also be a source of personal growth.

In CNM relationships, these single-leaning people mostly gravitate to two forms: solo polyamory and relationship anarchy. Ironically, these two relationship styles sometimes orient toward group interactions as well, and, depending on the people who are involved, they can be almost indistinguishable from a group focus when it is a collection of individuals all coming together to prioritize each other.

Solo Polyamory

Source: Max Pixel Contributors/Max Pixels

Much like other forms of CNM, each solo polyamorous person is different and will structure their relationships in a way that fits them best, so there are no hard or fast rules about what qualifies as solo poly. People who identify as solo polyamorous often desire emotional connection, ongoing intimacy, and sometimes sex. What they frequently don’t want is someone who functions as a primary partner —a spouse-like person who has expectations around what time they will be home, sharing holidays, and negotiating what they are “allowed” to do in their other relationship.

Unlike other forms of polyamory that tend to be couple- or group-oriented, solo polyamory is focused on the individual and what works best for them. It can look like someone being in one or multiple long-term relationships that allow everyone involved the freedom to structure their lives as they wish, a number of shorter-term relationships that fit the moment in time and then transition into something else, or anything in between.

Relationship Anarchy

For some people, relationship anarchy (RA) and solo polyamory are just different names for a similar relationship style focused on freedom and individual choice. Others, however, see a distinction between the two: Solo poly folks are often allosexual and perhaps romantic, in that they frequently want sexual relationships and enjoy romantic interactions. That is not to say that all solo poly folks are allosexual and romantic, but that those characteristics are more common among solo poly relationships than they are among relationship anarchy.

Relationships Essential Reads

3 Signs Your Partner Is a Sentimental Person

88 Reasons Why Your Partner Might Break Up With You

For folks who practice RA, sex and romance may or may not be part of their lives. Even if they are allosexual, they may not prioritize a sexual relationship as the center of their social world and instead organize their lives around other things or people besides their sexual or romantic partners. Similar to solo poly, RA emphasizes the individual’s control over their own relationships and freedom to define their interactions as best suits their ongoing lives, rather than a formulaic set of roles, rules, or boundaries that the larger society has deemed the right way to be or structure a relationship. Also similar to polyaffective relationships, some RA relationships prioritize nonsexual aspects of interactions above sexuality.

Ro Moëd, a writer and relationship coach who practices solo polyamory and relationship anarchy, challenges the idea that solo polyamory and relationship anarchy are about selfishness:

It’s true that these labels both challenge the idea that your romantic partner should always come first, but that doesn’t mean that my partners never come first....A traditional belief about relationships is that they take sacrifice. Solo polyamory and relationship anarchy encourage you to ask 'But why? What would relationships look like if we valued compromise rather than sacrifice?'