The Oneida Community: America’s Forgotten Utopia of Free Love, Eugenics, and Communal Living

John Humphrey Noyes

In the heart of 19th-century New York, long before the Summer of Love or modern communes, a group of religious idealists launched one of the most ambitious social experiments in American history. The Oneida Community, founded in 1848 by John Humphrey Noyes, dared to rewrite nearly every rule of social life, including marriage, parenting, property, labor, and even reproduction. For over 30 years, the community thrived under its radical logic. Though it ultimately collapsed, its legacy remains one of the most fascinating chapters in the story of American utopianism.

At the center of the movement was Noyes, a Yale-educated theologian who had been expelled from the seminary for proclaiming that true Christians could live sinlessly. He took this claim literally and socially. Convinced that the Second Coming had already occurred, Noyes preached that believers could build the Kingdom of God on earth through what he called "Perfectionism." That meant a life without greed, pride, or possessiveness, including in relationships.

A New Kind of Marriage

The Oneida Community's most controversial idea was its rejection of traditional marriage. Instead, it practiced what Noyes termed “complex marriage,” where all members were, in theory, married to one another. Romantic exclusivity was banned. Love, sex, and affection were to be shared communally, without jealousy or hierarchy. Emotional attachment was discouraged. Everyone could sleep with everyone, provided both parties and the leadership approved.

Children were raised collectively. Biological parents had little role in their own offspring’s upbringing. The idea was to remove ownership from love and child-rearing. In theory, this would create a society free of competition and emotional strife.

Breeding the Perfect Believer

In the 1860s, the Oneida Community introduced “stirpiculture,” a eugenics-like breeding program aimed at creating morally and spiritually superior children. Noyes and his inner circle selected who was allowed to reproduce. Participants were matched based on spiritual development and compatibility. Over a dozen approved pairings resulted in 58 children.

Today, this sounds like dystopian science fiction. But at the time, it was framed as a religious duty. The belief was that just as one could cultivate good crops, one could cultivate good humans.

Communal Life and Gender Roles

The community also experimented with communal labor and gender reform. The property was held in common, and members rotated through various tasks, including agricultural, industrial, and domestic responsibilities. The silverware business that eventually became Oneida Limited was born here, part of the community’s attempt to become self-sufficient.

Women were encouraged to delay motherhood, avoid domestic servitude, and participate in leadership, more than was common at the time. However, real power still often rested with Noyes and other male elders. Equality was aspirational more than actual.

Still, in contrast to Victorian norms, women in Oneida had more say in when and whether they became mothers. Men were expected to practice coitus reservatus (intercourse without ejaculation), which doubled as a form of spiritual discipline and contraception. For women, this meant fewer pregnancies and more control over their bodies.

Decline and Aftermath

By the 1870s, internal tensions were growing. Younger members wanted monogamy. Critics questioned Noyes’s control over sexual and social decisions. After accusations of statutory rape and growing legal threats, Noyes fled to Canada in 1879. Without its founder, the community crumbled.

In 1881, Oneida formally abandoned its religious structure and rebranded as a joint-stock company. Ironically, what lived on wasn’t the theology or social order, but the silverware business, Oneida Limited, now a household name.

What the Oneida Experiment Left Behind

The Oneida Community remains one of the most radical and well-documented experiments in communal living. Its blend of theological utopianism, sexual libertarianism, and early eugenics offers a complicated legacy. While it challenged conventional norms about love, gender, and family, it also enforced intense social control and hierarchy.
​
Today, the story of Oneida invites reflection on the balance between personal freedom and collective idealism. Its failures warn of the dangers of charismatic leadership and engineered social design, but its vision, flawed as it was, also points to a timeless human urge: to build a better world from scratch.