Quote · Multiamory: Rethinking Modern Relationships
578 - Getting Back Together with an Ex: Great Idea or Terrible Idea?
Where this was said
Relationship Structure Flexibility in Non-Monogamy
At 48:50 · chapter starts 45:45
Emily develops the structural flexibility argument: in monogamy, a relationship either is or isn't, with a fairly prescribed set of shapes it can take. In non-monogamy, a person who once occupied a primary-partner role could become a comet partner if they moved away, or a periodic connection if intensive involvement no longer works. [1] — Jace Lindgren "The non-monogamous world praises 'transitioning a relationship' but side-eyes 'getting back with an ex' — yet if you follow standard advice…" 48:00 The relationship can be revisited and restructured rather than simply restarted or discarded. Jace observes a cultural double standard within the polyamorous community itself: 'transitioning a relationship' is celebrated as sophisticated and evolved, while 'getting back together with an ex' is treated with suspicion. Yet if someone follows standard advice — take space, heal, reassess — the result looks identical to reconciliation. The label, not the process, carries the moral weight. The hosts agree that re-engaging with an ex under a genuinely different structure, chosen deliberately rather than out of longing or lack of options, could actually be a healthier and more creative outcome than either a full restart or a clean cut.
The non-monogamous world praises 'transitioning a relationship' but side-eyes 'getting back with an ex' — yet if you follow standard advice to take space after a breakup and then reassess, the result looks identical. The label, not the process, is doing the moral work.
Some exes belong in the trash — obviously bad, obviously done. The dangerous ones are the 'fridge exes': relationships with unresolved potential that seem like they could still be good. Even thorough due diligence doesn't guarantee safety, as Dedeker's bacon poisoning story vividly illustrates.
