I've written about the Troubadors, Gnostics, Buddhists, and incels. But yes, I see your point, which is that if "romantic love" is defined as a kind of free-for-all, then the orthodoxy has often been opposed to free love in that sense.

In the article in question, I was thinking of "romantic love" in broader terms, as being distinct from brotherly or platonic love. What exactly "eros" or "romance" entails would certainly be a fair but separate question.