Platonic Life Partners – New Models

We are stuck in this notion that couples who form life partnerships of any type – straight, gay, lesbian, etc. – must somehow be romantic relationships, mostly with sexual interest thrown in of course.

Think about it. People spend vast sums of money on wedding celebrations – the gowns, the suits or tuxes, the flowers, the reception venue, the food, the booze, the gifts, and more. All to honor romantic relationships (and sexual relationships) as a couple begins its life together.

Many marital relationships last. Just as many marital relationships do not. There are a lot of reasons for this – one sexual partner cheats on the other; they run into financial problems; communication breaks down; the romantic connection just dies out.

Why is There Only One Model for Life Partnerships?

In reality, there isn’t. It’s just that society has created this illusion, through the media mostly, that “living happily ever after” means a couple, more recently of any variety, share romantic love and physical intimacy.

This has not always been the case throughout history, so let’s look at some of the historical aspects of partnerships. You’ll find it pretty interesting we think.

Historical Examples of Partnerships

To see how we have gotten to this rather “thin” definition of partnership, we have to take a look at the lengthy history of partnerships and marriage

The Stroy of David and Jonathan in the Hebrew Bible

From the book of Samuel, we are given the story of two young men, both of whom were in contention for the throne but who formed a covenantal friendship that was “knit to the soul.” King Saul had promised his daughter in marriage to whoever could slay Goliath. David, a Phillistine, did so, and was taken into the royal palace. Johnathan, the legal son of Saul was also a contender for the throne.

These two young men formed a bond of friendship that was stronger than any marriage. Over time, Saul became disenamored with David and decided he wanted him killed. Johnathan was having none of this and protected David solidifying their covenantal friendship. In return, David gave his armor and sword to Johnathan as a symbol of his unending trust. Their deep affection surpassed other loyalties. Ultimately, David became the King of Israel, as a side note here.

Ancient Greece. The philosopher Plato wrote treatises on a ton of subjects. One of those was titled “The Submissions,” in which a group of fictional characters discussed the topic of love. The conclusion was that the highest form of love was an intellectual connection without any physical intimacy in which two souls connected in a platonic partnership, whether of the same or opposite sex.

In ancient Rome, men spoke of their friends as “the other half of my soul,” indicative of obvious deep feelings, those friendships serving a much higher priority than any marriage.

Moving into the Middle Ages, there was a ritual called the “Sworn brotherhood.” The sworn brotherhood was two men who had deep feelings for one another went to church, placed their two hands together on the Gospels and had their friendship blessed by a priest. The sworn brotherhood meant that they had a life partnership that surpassed any other relationships they had, including their marriages. Often these sworn brotherhood partners would even be buried together.

There are examples of a sworn brotherhood type of relationship in other parts of the world too, including even China.

Today, these intimate friendships might be called a bromance, but more likely than not, such close relationships would probably warrant the label of gay.

Up to this point, we haven’t talked about marriage. And that has a history of its own.

Historical Concepts of Marriage

In ancient and medieval times, marriage had nothing to do with romantic love. They served to merge kingdoms or families of wealth, in order to keep the ruling order intact. Romantic relationships were of no consideration. Wives were property, whose purpose was to spawn offspring to keep the bloodline going, and men often satisfied their sexual interests elsewhere.

Differing cultural contexts played a role as the concept of marriage began to change. Even when romance became a factor, young people were “required” to stay within their own kind when considering marriage, and this included such things as religion, race, and social class. In some societies, like in Hindu India, it was mandated.

Such differing cultural contexts and their “rules” were confining and resulted in men and women alike finding greater freedom and joy in close platonic relationships – intimate friendships outside of the marriage where a person could be themselves and fulfill one’s self actualization without criticism or judgement – only acceptance and support. Many of these are intimate same sex friendships, but they can be heterosexual too. Some have termed them romantic friendships, but that doesn’t fit. Romantic friendships suggest inherently sexual which these are not. Romantic friendships suggest a just friends with benefits arrangement or some type of romantic partner arrangement. Platonic life partnerships have no romance or sex involved.

What Platonic Life Partnerships Look Like

There is no box into which platonic life partnerships fit. There are just so many possible configurations, and that is what relationship expert Rhaina Cohen recently spoke about during an interview published by Vox Magazine. Cohen is the author of a bestselling book, The Other Significant Others: Reimagining Life With Friendship at the Center. Being a platonic life partner can place someone in a variety of diverse relationship configurations. Here’s just a few:

Being a Romantic Partner Too

Many people say they are marrying their best friend. That’s a good thing to a point. But if your romantic partner, that one partner, is your entire circle of friendship, your life is unbalanced. If you have no one other than that one romantic partner, what happens if that partnership should end? Your entire “world” comes crashing down and your entire well being is at serious risk.

A breakup like this would be much more survivable if you have a circle of platonic life partners who can help pick up the pieces, lend a listening ear, provide social activities that get you out and about, and support your recovery in any way you might need – in other words, just be there for you.

The point is this: yes, your romantic partner can be your platonic life partner too, but never should they be your only life partner.

Best Friends

Everyone has at least one best friend that they have known for years, even from childhood or at least teenage years. And some new friends have certainly been added since then. While they may not all have the label “best friend,” they are close enough to be platonic life partners.

And there are all sorts of relationship configurations with these friendships too. They may be in different parts of the country, maintaining communication via phone, email, and messaging. They may live nearby and participate in a ton of activities together, forming a social network that is both supportive and fun.

Or they may choose to live together. Lots of intimate same sex friendships do. They become roommates, share expenses, and support one another when issues and challenges arise. So, they are not just best friends. They are platonic life partners.

Family Members

In most families, there are a variety of close relationships and some not-to-close relationships. Some of us are particularly close to siblings who become platonic live partners for life. Others of us are especially close to one or both parents, again platonic live partners.

We feel comfortable sharing our life experiences, our struggles, our goals, and our successes freely with these platonic life partners, and they are there for us with advice, encouragement, and support.

We may not put these relationships into the best friend category, because there are some things we may hold back revealing, but they do nonetheless form a support system of platonic life partners.

Work Colleagues

One of the things Cohen does not address in her book is a theory in psychology of the four layers of personality that everyone has. According to this theory, these four levels determine how much we reveal to others. Level one is our public personality, that which we reveal to everyone out there. The second layer is that part of our personality we reveal to friends with whom we are somewhat close but would not call best friends. The third layer is reserved for our closest friends who would be those platonic life partners Cohen refers to. And the fourth layer is that which we keep hidden from everyone, our deepest feelings and emotions that we do not want anyone else to know about.

When we talk about work colleagues, we are probably speaking to level one and two relationships. In a very formal work environment, our superiors probably see level one. Those we work with on a daily basis and with whom we have come to develop a closer relationship probably see level two.

But then, there are work colleagues that we establish a closer relationship with. Not only do we have an easy and comfortable relationship at work, but we also begin to socialize outside of work – going to happy hours, planning a Saturday shopping or rock climbing. In the relationship categories department, they are probably at level three and can be considered potential platonic life partners, even if their career paths involve changes in workplaces.

Value and nurture these relationships. These are people who will be there for you, and you should be there for them.

Mentor/Mentee Relationships

Among relationship categories, these may be most interesting. These usually occur in academic or workplace settings.

Suppose a high school student is experiencing any type of struggle and has confided in a teacher they feel comfortable with. That teacher helps that student through their struggles, and a bond has been established that continues past that classroom experience. They keep in touch, and the former student contacts that mentor when needing advice or help. The mentor is glad to be of help and becomes a type of platonic life partner.

In the workplace, a superior takes a particular liking to a subordinate, perhaps a newbie in whom they see lots of potential. They take that newcomer under their wing, providing advice and counsel and promoting their value within the organization. This relationship is definitely on a level two and may continue even after one or both have left that workplace. This is a valuable relationship to keep over time, though it will never reach a level three relationship.

Spontaneous Encounters

This is more common than many believe. We have a favorite true story as an example of this.

A woman was on a flight home from a short vacation. She was seated next to another woman – a complete stranger. During the flight, she noticed that the stranger was reading a political book that was her absolute current favorite. They began a conversation, first about the book and then about other things in their lives. Turns out they had so much in common that the two women developed a same sex friendship in a matter of 2 1/2 hours. After they landed, they exchanged contact information, realized that they lived only miles apart, and became platonic life partners that are clearly at level 3.

Don’t discount these chance meetings. They can happen at the gym, at a bar, at a coffee shop, in a class, almost anywhere.

Weaving the Thread of Marriage into the Mix

We’ve already talked some about marriage. There was nothing romantic or even sexual about it when it was first fashioned. It was to merge empires, royal families, and to keep the “family name” pure. Marriages were arranged and, in some cases, are still arranged today. And more often than not, a man found sexual and romantic partners outside of the marriage. And these extramarital partners often provided emotional support too. But above all, they were inherently sexual in nature.

Even if marriages are not formally arranged, there are some societal pressures and expectations within groups that “dictate” who young people marry. When looking for a romantic partner, young people must stay within their own subculture, and there can be unintended consequences if they don’t. One most recent example is UK Prince Harry marrying American actress Meghan Markle. Not only did he marry a commoner, but she was of mixed racial heritage. Ultimately, he gave up his title and moved to the US.

Other groups, such as Muslims and Jews do encourage and expect their young people to marry within their subcultures.

Expansive thinking in recent times is slowly seeing marriage as an evolving institution, encouraging open mindedness, and that’s a good thing.

But still, no matter how much we are encouraging open mindedness in who marries, and no matter how much marriage is an evolving institution, we continue to set it up and celebrate it as an ideal partnership, even if it is between same sex couples.

Which brings us to the whole issue of interesting and different ideas about partnerships without any sexual and romantic connections. Where do they fit into this larger picture of partnerships?

Taking a Short Historical Look at Platonic Life Partnerships

Let’s go back to the Hebrew Bible. Ruth lost her husband. Her son died leaving her daughter-in-law Naomi a widow too. Though they were culturally very different, they joined forced and moved to Bethlehem to live together, sharing their lives. This may be the first recorded account of a platonic life relationship.

But it is not unique. Through history, women (and men) have chosen to live in diverse relationship configurations, combining their assets, supporting one another, raising children together and becoming permanent platonic life partners.

Let’s explore interesting and different ideas about platonic partnerships that flew in the face of societal expectations and established platonic living arrangements from the 19th century forward. This exploration will focus primarily on women, because they were the gender with no rights or freedoms at this time. Men, on the other hand, were free to live whatever lifestyle they chose.

Platonic Life Partnerships in the 19th and 20th Centuries

It’s important to remember that women had no rights – this was their life orientation. They were property in a male-dominated society and submitted to their husband’s will, no matter what.

Enter Martha McWhirter

Martha and her husband ran a grocery store in Belton Texas and were very active in the local Methodist church. Martha ran a women’s Bible study class on Sundays. The women who attended became close friends and began to share stories of their horrible home lives – being brutalized by their husbands and praying that their husbands would change. These shared stories were shocking to Martha. They were trapped and powerless – financially dependent on their spouses, raising children, no prospects for employment (which was unheard of, and, by the way, who would care for the children if they did work).

Eventually, Martha and her husband opened their home above the grocery store to women who were trying to get out of a bad marriage. In return, they helped in the grocery store as sort of a rent payment.

They got small jobs around town and shared childcare with other women in the home. They did laundry and cleaned homes of others in the town for income. Ultimately, they pooled their money and bought a boarding house in Benton. They shared expenses from their pooled money, raised the kids, and lived independently of their husbands. The house became known as the Belton Women’s Commonwealth.

From there, they established a corporation, bought hotels, and eventually some land outside of town where they grew their own food and where many women chose to live in a communal society. They grw food to feed all of their employees.

Not an Isolated Example

These women in Benton eventually opened their own businesses and became quite prosperous. All across the country, moreover, women began to rebel against societal expectations and come together embracing expansive thinking that female living arrangements would be better for them than in a traditional marriage. Of course, some were widowed; some were from abusive marital situations; and some of these were closeted lesbians, but so what? They were operating on deep friendships that only platonic life partners can give one another.

Communes began to pop up around the country, and some are still alive and well today, though not many (reasons in a minute).

The Benefits of a Communal Life Orientation in Practice

While these communes came to differ greatly in the details, there have been some overriding benefits of them all:

• Women have work schedules just as if they were on the job
• Children go to school where they are taught by teachers for a normal school day
• Raising children is a community thing. (Hmm…sound familiar? How about “It takes a village to raise a child”) Looks like some “normal” communities could take this practice of raising children to heart.
• Women have leisure time on their hands. They have used this time to learn and to develop interests and hobbies – something unheard of in 19th and early 20th century America. Women who never learned to read and write did so. In some places, their thirst for books evolved into big libraries that were utilized by the town folk. In Belton, the corporation actually opened the first public library for the whole town.

Mid-Century Back to Land Movement

In the 1960s and 70s, communes continued to pop up all over, mostly in rural areas outside of towns and cities, and some of these configurations were embracing expansive thinking by including both men and women. This allowed men who wanted to be stay-at-home dads from facing criticism and disdain from the “outside” world. Their partners or wives would leave and go to work during the day while dad raised the kids. These communes continued to be self-sustaining, growing their own food, selling surplus in town to purchase needed items, and just generally sharing a happy and comfortable environment.

Enter Women’s Lib

Thank you, Gloria Steinman. By the 1970s, the women’s liberation movement was in full swing. And it flew in the face of traditional concepts of a woman’s traditional place in society.

• Women with college degrees were demanding equal pay and equal access to professional careers
• Women were demanding equal financial rights. (Women could not even have a bank account without a father or husband also on the account until 1974).
• Women demanded entry into trade schools to get certified in skilled trades only reserved for men
• Women began to run for political offices at all levels of government, winning and taking important roles in policy and law.
• Women became entrepreneurs, opening their own businesses.

This was also a time to explore interesting and new types of platonic living arrangements. Whether it was two women, or a woman and a man, deciding to become platonic partners, the idea of platonic life relationships was no longer a different or distinct concept. That distinct concept was full blown. And changing societal expectations played a key role. To understand how changing societal expectations have played a role, consider the following:

• There are much richer connections among men and women than just marriage and our “need” to celebrate it the way we do.
• Whether it’s just two people with one partner giving and receiving deep affection from the other, or a group of people committing to a deep friendship serving everyone else in that group in such partnerships, even though these partnerships are not recognized legally
• Pressure to have the concept of marriage expanded to include platonic partnerships. Such partnerships should be legally considered domestic partnerships with a marriage expanded definition. This needs to happen. (it is in a couple of places).

Let’s Talk Retirement

From 1985 – 1992, a sitcom aired on TV called “The Golden Girls.” In it, four retired women pooled their resources and set up house together. They shared everything, not just expenses. Their close friendships superseded and other relationships they had, including ex-husbands, dates, etc. They shared their innermost thoughts and feelings and expressed deep affection for one another, despite their disagreements and petty conflicts.

Here is another subculture that is commonly perceived to be pretty much taken care of in their retirement years. They have their social security, and, even if their husbands have passed, they have their kids to rely on too.

Not so fast. Kids may live far away. Dead husbands don’t help with chores, shopping, and other errands. This also goes for retired men whose wives have passed too.

The solution? New platonic life partner configurations, either same or hetero. It really doesn’t matter anymore, especially with retired folk. Close friendships come in various forms and colors, not like in younger years when such stuff would necessarily entail lust or same sex desire. Old people can express deep affection and more intense emotions without being suspect. There are much richer connections for them that certainly do not necessarily entail lust or same sex desire (or heterosexual desire either).

The beauty of designing life in all of its various forms to suit one’s own idea emerged primarily in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. They differ greatly from some of the commonly perceived communal configurations of earlier centuries, but changing societal expectations played a definite role in all of this.

And guess what? Anyone can fulfill one’s self actualization at any age.

The Inevitable Decline of Female Communal Spots

Female communal practice extended from earlier centuries into the mid to late 20th centuries. But one of the unintended consequences of the women’s lib movement was that the need for such communal friendships diminished. Despite its lengthy history into which this practice extended, women were now designing life independently.

This didn’t mean that their need for friendship diminished or for life partner relationships declined. It just meant that they formed other relationships that would satisfy those needs. The idea emerged that platonic life partners could be found in a variety of places, as independent women seek those relationships.

It doesn’t mean that the intense emotions of platonic life partners are in any way diminished. In fact, more intense emotions are quite likely, as women operate in a freer, more open climate.

For lesbians and gay males, same sex desires grew in this freer climate, especially since marriage legality fostered it.

But still, here we are talking about marriage again.

It’s time to take a serious look at an expanded view of what many call domestic partnerships.

An Expanded Notion of Domestic Partnerships

In her interview with Vox, Cohen recently spoke to this new idea of a legal document that would apply to those in a variety of domestic partnership configurations.

She specifically talked about a Colorado law called a “designated beneficiary agreement.” Now, “designated beneficiaries” have been around for a long time. People place beneficiary names on their investments and assets, in order to avoid probate court when they die.

But in Colorado, the term has a different meaning for domestic partnerships. It comes as a simple form that allows people in platonic life relationships to name individuals who are in charge of various aspects of their lives – an a la carte menu of 16 rights and benefits actually.

People can check off which of their life partners should be responsible for such things as medical decisions, end-of-life care and such.

One person may not be the right one for specific decisions. For example, a partner with intense emotions might not be the person to make end-of-life decisions.

Cohen suggests that such a form could be completed at the local DMV or post office – just a series of boxes to check with the responsible person for each one. This would serve to provide fully legal status to platonic life relationships.

Let’s Try to Recap

If you have read through this entire article with care, you have now become an expert on the subject of platonic life partner relationships, what they mean, how they developed through the centuries, and how they have changed. The definitive expert on the matter is Rhaina Cohen, and much of this article is based upon her research and conclusions. If you want to know more, you should really read her book.

Life partner relationships can be simple or complicated, especially in today’s environment of all the places in which these relationships can develop and grow. But that’s the beauty of it all. There are so many environments in which these can grow and develop, the joy is in the discovering.