Platonic Life Partnerships Unveiled

Source: mododeolhar/Pexels

I recently spoke with my friend and author, Rhaina Cohen, about platonic live partners. In her forthcoming book, The Other Significant Others: Reimagining Life With Friendship at the Center, she shares stories of people who have decided to choose a friend as a life partner rather than a romantic partner. This post comes from the conversation we shared ahead of her book release.

I hope you enjoy this as much as I enjoyed our conversation.

Dr. Marisa G. Franco (MF): What is a platonic life partner?

Rhaina Cohen (RC): A platonic life partner is a type of friendship where people engage in activities typically associated with romantic partners, such as building a life together and planning a future. This can include living together, owning a home, raising children, and growing old. Those involved in these friendships see themselves as a unit, thinking of themselves as a "we."

MF: Your book delves into the historical precedent for platonic life partners. Can you elaborate on that?

RC: Absolutely. There's a lengthy history, going back to examples like David and Jonathan in the Hebrew Bible, who formed a covenantal friendship. I also explore the practice of "sworn brotherhood," dating back to the fourth century, where monks formed spiritual unions. This practice extended to lay people in the Byzantine Empire and later evolved into what were known as romantic friendships in England and France during the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries—which were really intimate, effusive, same-sex friendships.

Interpreting these relationships can be challenging due to differing cultural contexts. Some of these friendships may have involved sexual elements, with the friendship serving as a cover. However, my sense reading this history is that these relationships often represented a unique conception of friendship, where deep love didn't necessarily entail lust. Overall, these friendships were characterized by more intense emotions and commitment than what is commonly perceived as possible today.

MF: What prompted the shift in perception, making such partnerships less acceptable now?

RC: The invention of labels like hetero and homosexuality played a significant role. Before the 20th century, there was no clear identity category of being gay or straight, along with the associated stigma against same-sex desire. Previously, it was acceptable, especially among women, to express deep affection without it being viewed as inherently sexual. However, as sexologists emerged around the turn of the 20th century, moral panic around same-sex desire grew, leading to a decline in depictions of intimate same-sex friendships in popular culture.

Additionally, the evolving institution of marriage and changing societal expectations played a part. In earlier centuries, marriage was not necessarily based on finding a soulmate or love. Over time, as friendship diminished, marriage expanded, with people expecting more from marital relationships. By the late 20th century, the idea emerged that marriage would fulfill one's self-actualization, leaving little room for the intense emotions and commitments associated with friendships.

MF: So, essentially, the rise of homophobia and societal changes contributed to the decline of intimate friendships?

RC: Yes, I think that’s a big part of it, especially among men. I also think there was an overcorrection in response to a history of straightwashing. For instance, I was talking to somebody who went to Wellesley College, which is an all-women's college, and they were telling me that it was a very kind of queer-friendly place, but that one of the consequences of that was it was hard to have a best friend because everyone just assumed that you were dating if you were two women who were close to each other. This unintended consequence, even out of open-mindedness, makes it harder for people to recognize that deep feelings can exist without a sexual interest.

MF: It seems that creating a distinct concept for platonic life partners is necessary for recognition. How can we facilitate this recognition?

RC: Establishing the category is helpful, but a broader shift involves untethering people from rigid categories. Starting from the individual rather than predefined roles or relationship categories is crucial. While I focus on friendships, the same applies to other relationships, like siblings. Embracing expansive thinking and asking questions about ideal companionship, living arrangements, and life orientation can lead to unique answers beyond societal scripts, such as asking yourself—If you're designing life from scratch, who do you want to spend a ton of time with? Who do you want to maybe raise a family with? How many people do you want to orient your life around? Who do you want to live with? Who do you feel most seen by? Who do you want to be surrounded by?—could allow you to explore interesting and different ideas of what life looks like.

Legitimizing the possibility of friends in these roles helps, but encouraging open-mindedness about diverse relationship configurations is equally important.

MF: It's interesting to consider who satisfies you the most without assuming a romantic partner needs to be that person.

RC: Absolutely. It's about questioning what one wants in life and exploring various possibilities. Ideal housing situations, relationships, and configurations can differ greatly among individuals. Maybe you want one partner or maybe you would love to have a romantic connection, but you also want to have one or two other “ride or die” people, and maybe one of those is a sibling. I think that there are all sorts of configurations. And partnership is a form that really fits a lot of people, but even then, I think you can move outward to think more about who are the closest people who are surrounding us.

Relationships Essential Reads

How to Protect Your Relationship With the '80/20 Principle'

How to Make Relationship Conflicts Feel Less Overwhelming

Partnership can take various forms, and even if it involves one person, there's room for other close relationships. Recognizing that the person one lives with, raises children with, and makes decisions with doesn't have to be the same individual can lead to richer connections, whether in partnership or close friendships.