Queer theory has been instrumental in pushing back against normative understandings of gender and sexuality, offering new ways of understanding identity, desire, pleasure, and community formation that are inclusive of non-binary experiences. But while queer theories have had significant impact on academic fields such as sociology, philosophy, and anthropology, less attention has been paid to its application to interpersonal relationships. In this article, I will explore the idea of an ethics of impermanence in queer relationality – i.e., how queer theories can inform our understanding of temporary or short-term romantic relationships.
The traditional Western paradigm for love is based on monogamy, commitment, permanence, and exclusivity.
There are many forms of loving and being loved outside of these parameters, including but not limited to polyamory, open relationships, flirting, dating, casual sex, one-night stands, and emotional intimacy without physical attraction. Queer theorists have argued that these alternative modes of loving and being loved challenge heteronormative assumptions about what constitutes legitimate intimacy.
Eve Sedgwick argues that "queerness" refers to any form of sexual practice that falls outside of the dominant heterosexual matrix (Sedgwick 1990). This means that all non-heteronormative forms of relationality should be considered "queer."
Some queer theorists have also suggested that not only do we need a more expansive definition of "queer," but we must recognize that different kinds of relationships may require different ethical frameworks.
Judith Butler suggests that we might need to think about "a different kind of temporality that would allow us to think through questions of queer intimacies," suggesting that the concept of the "promise" could be replaced by "the gift" as a way of thinking about relationality (Butler 2015).
I will explore how an ethics of impermanence can inform our understanding of temporary or short-term romantic relationships. Specifically, I will examine the ways in which such relationships can be understood in terms of pleasure, desire, and risk. In so doing, I hope to demonstrate that while impermanent relationships may not offer the same stability and security as permanent ones, they nevertheless provide unique opportunities for meaningful connection and growth.
Let's consider the role of pleasure in queer relationality. Queer theorist Lauren Berlant argues that pleasure is central to both intimacy and survival; she calls it "crucial to any possibility of worldmaking and world-keeping" (Berlant 2011, p. 34). In other words, pleasure helps us cope with life's challenges and gives us something to look forward to. Therefore, short-term relationships can still be pleasurable, even if they are unlikely to last forever.
Impermanent relationships can be desirable because they offer the opportunity for experimentation and play. Queer theorist Eve Sedgwick famously argued that "queerness is a mode, not just an identity" (Sedgwick 1990), meaning that all forms of relationality should be considered queer in some sense. Short-term relationships allow us to try out different kinds of love without committing to them long-term, creating space for exploration and adventure.
Impermanent relationships require us to take more risks than traditional monogamous partnerships. Because we know they won't last forever, we must invest more emotionally in each encounter, making every moment count. This kind of risk can lead to greater emotional intensity and fulfillment.
While permanent relationships have their own benefits, impermanent ones offer unique opportunities for pleasure, desire, and growth. By recognizing these possibilities, we can create a more inclusive understanding of romance and intimacy that is open to all forms of loving and being loved.
Is there an ethics of impermanence in queer relationality?
Queer relationality is not limited by traditional concepts of monogamy, marriage, and familial structures. It is based on the idea that relationships should be fluid and non-hierarchical, with no predetermined rules or expectations. Queer relationality challenges the heteronormative assumption that love must be exclusive and permanent, emphasizing instead the importance of communication, negotiation, and flexibility.