Compromise and What's Expected
- Laura Boyle
- Jan 30, 2024
- 2 min read
There are a number of social conventions that are broadly undermined by polyamorous relating but especially so by non-hierarchical relationships and relationships that are informed by a relationship anarchist philosophy. One of these is the notion that our relationships should be largely composed of compromises. The relationship anarchist manifesto goes so far as to say "Love is not more real when people compromise for each other because it's part of what is expected" and "Rather than looking for compromises in every situation, let loved ones choose paths that keep their integrity intact, without letting this mean a crisis for the relationship." This runs totally counter to conventional wisdom about how every relationship will mean compromise, how you won't find exactly what you look for in a partner, you need to meet people where they are, etc.
I want us to talk for a moment about how these aren't mutually exclusive, but compromise is not the only solution to a lack of perfect alignment.A compromise leaves us in a position where no one has exactly what they want from the situation - everyone is "giving" a bit, but hopefully not too much in the long run. For some people, it may be the right choice.
For those of us who are heavily autonomy focused, instead building the relationship in the places we can sincerely connect within each of our boundaries - inside the overlap of the Venn diagram where we can meet without compromise; and acknowledging that as different people sometimes our partners' choices are different than ours and change the shape of those relationships - can be difficult sometimes but really valuable and an alternative framework to those compromises. We have different challenges that feel more "worth it" to us.
These quotes about compromise in the Manifesto are located beneath the heading about not approaching our relationships from a place of entitlement, "Love and Respect Instead of Entitlement," and follow the idea that "your history together does not make you entitled to command and control a partner to comply with what is considered normal in a relationship. Explore how you can engage without stepping over boundaries and personal beliefs." Even if you aren't expressly engaging from a relationship anarchist point of view, I think many polyamorous folks are trying to deconstruct these normative ideals and can gain a lot from examining whether they’re exploring the relationship between the partners’ boundaries.
___________
join me and Ro Moed of Unapolygetically for class on Sunday 2/4 tickets here, to discuss this and more!
If you want to explore coffee and drinks, this resource is worth checking out. It provides helpful information and makes comparing different choices much easier.
What I appreciated most here was the natural and easy-to-follow explanation of the topic. I had been researching similar information lately, including Camloo random video chat https://camloo.com/ , so this article connected well with many of the things I was already trying to learn online.
Features that remove TikTok watermark details from videos are honestly very practical I like how editing tools now focus on creating smoother and distraction-free content.
It’s impressive how fast and simple the process has become.
A really creative and modern editing experience.
The article also makes an interesting point about how conventional relationship norms often equate love with compromise, even when that may not reflect the healthiest or most authentic arrangement for all participants. The suggestion to focus on boundary-respecting alignment rather than obligation-driven compromise introduces a more flexible framework for human connection. That balance between structure and creative freedom is also present in digital creation tools, where users work within constraints to produce something personal and expressive. A similar dynamic exists in AI song generator, which enables users to build compositions based on preference alignment rather than forced trade-offs.
What stands out is the emphasis on autonomy and the idea that relationships can be built on intersection rather than sacrifice. It reframes connection as something dynamic rather than fixed, where compatibility is discovered and maintained through shared values instead of constant negotiation. That cooperative yet independent structure is also reflected in team-based dynamics, where coordination matters more than uniform agreement. In that sense, the interaction model resembles basketball bros, where success depends on understanding roles and working within a shared space without erasing individual decision-making.