View Single Post
Old 11-24-2013, 10:23 PM
Eponine Eponine is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 125

I'm glad that you're interested in RA and made a separate thread for it.

I think RA is more radical than poly. Someone who is RA is probably poly, but I don't think many polys are RA. First, hierarchical poly is incompatible with the RA philosophy, which is against entitlement and arbitrary rules. Second, even many non-hierarchical poly people draw a clear line between "just friends" and "romantic partners", whereas RA aims at dissolving the rigid relationship categories. This blog post did a pretty good job of explaining the differences between poly and RA.

Originally Posted by hyperskeptic View Post
The enforcement of those obligations should come from within the relationship itself, by direct accountability to each of the others with whom we have relationships, rather than from social norms and institutions.

In fact, the whole idea seems to be founded on a deeply ethical idea of respecting other individuals as individuals, working things out on the basis of freedom and reciprocity.
I agree. One of my SOs has said that RA means a "bottom-up" approach to do relationships: Forget about all the pre-set categories and what a relationship is "supposed" to look like; instead, just work out the terms and conditions of each individual relationship based on the participants' unique needs. Hence the "customized commitment" idea in the RA manifesto.
Heteroromantic asexual female, sex-positive, childfree, relationship anarchist.
Married to G, and in a partially non-romantic, completely non-sexual and long-distance triad with A and L.
Reply With Quote