Consensual non-monogamy

Although consensual non-monogamies have grown in exposure and popularity among both the public and academics, they remain largely marginalized and stigmatized. While some research has examined individuals’ perceptions of non-monogamies as a whole, few have focused specifically on perceptions of polyamory. The aim of this study was to explore and render explicit such attitudes and perceptions using an inductive approach to research. Online unsolicited narratives were sought for the purpose of this study. A total of 482 comments posted in response to three articles on the topic of polyamory were collected and analyzed using thematic analysis. Five overarching themes were identified: polyamory as 1) valid and beneficial; 2) unsustainable; 3) perverse, amoral, and unappealing; 4) acceptable; and 5) deficient. The findings provide insight on individuals’ reactions to polyamorous relationships and beliefs surrounding monogamy, and are further discussed in light of previous research on stigma, and of contemporary discourses on relationships, love, and commitment.

Polyamory is the practice of having multiple emotionally close relationships that may or may not be sexual. Research concerning polyamory has just begun to determine how relationships among partners in polyamorous arrangements may vary. Most of the research assessing perceptions of polyamorous partners has focused on primary-secondary configurations; however, non-hierarchical configurations exist and can involve having multiple primary partners or having only non-primary partners. The current research is the first to examine perceptions of partners and relationship quality in various polyamorous configurations and compares results for each configuration to monogamous partners. Results from online convenience samples suggest that co-primary and non-primary configurations are common among polyamorous participants, with approximately 38% identifying with one of these configurations in 2013 and 55% in 2017. Furthermore, our results suggest that while relationships with partners in co-primary and non-primary structures still differ in some ways (e.g., investment, acceptance, secrecy, time spent having sex), they are closer to their ideals on several psychologically meaningful indicators of relationship quality (e.g., commitment and satisfaction). In other words, despite rejecting hierarchical primary-secondary labels, many of the same relationship qualities differ systematically among partners in non-hierarchical relationships. Furthermore, pseudo-primary partners and primary partners in these relationships are more comparable to monogamous partners than they are to secondary partners. We discuss how these results inform our understanding of polyamorous and monogamous relationships and suggest future directions based on these findings.

Liebster Sascha und alle Anderen,
Hier meine subjektiven Auszüge,(4 Seiten) aus:
PIEPER, MARIANNE & BAUER, ROBIN: Polyamorie:...Begehren als transformative Kraft?
IN: Journal für Psychologie, Jg. 22(2014), Ausgabe 1 (35 Seiten)
und aus: Gregoratto, Frederica: Elf Thesen zur Polyamorie IN: Philosophie Magazin Nr. 04/2021 (4 Seiten)

SASCHA (BECK), YOU ARE IMPORTANT TO  ME
I NEED YOU TO SURVIVE and TO HEAL MY WOUNDS FOR REAL JOY

DIR sendet vratlichst
LOVE and NEED

YOUR
Ravi

Monogamism is the dominant belief that the only legitimate relational orientation is being monogamous & only acceptable relationship form is that of monogamy. Trainings conducted focused on reducing monogamism, & clinically working with relational orientation minorities & members of multi-partnered relationship configurations. Using the Monogamism Measure: Awareness, Knowledge, & Skills competence of participants’ was measured pre-post training. Results indicate statistically significant increases in awareness, knowledge, & skills after training.

Undergrad research paper about the stigma, myths, and realities affecting children in polyamorous families. One of the common concerns is that consensual non-monogamy is harmful to children, but that is far from the truth. In fact, as stated in this paper, there may be benefits to polyamory that monogamy does not afford. The harms that are often cited when speaking about polyamory, or even polygamy, are not inherent to those structures and not unique to them, however the benefits seem to be. Polyamory may not necessarily be better for raising healthy children, but there are reasons to think polyamory is at least as good as our “ideal” of monogamy.

This M.A. thesis develops a black feminist approach to the study of non/monogamy, connecting conversations in black feminist thought, black sexuality studies, and consensual nonmonogamy (CNM) studies. Scholarship in CNM studies examines compulsory monogamy as a system of regulation that favors two-partner intimate relationships, but often does not recognize compulsory monogamy’s role within larger racial projects. Without sustained engagement with work on racialized sexuality, CNM studies offers little challenge to the racial-sexual order underlying compulsions toward monogamy, and thus has limited applications in the context of black populations. However, literature on black sexuality helps illuminate varied dimensions of compulsion as we work to consider nonmonogamy beyond a universalized white subject.

In this thesis, I center black feminist analyses of racialized sexuality to highlight how racialized sexual regulation in the US constitutes a form of “compulsory non/monogamy,” a system of simultaneous compulsion toward and disruption of (more legibly) monogamous and heteronormative forms of intimacy. I focus especially on the work of Adrienne Davis, Hortense Spillers, and Dorothy Roberts, whose work offers foundational analyses of race, reproduction, and domination; and L.H. Stallings, whose theorization of “funk” continues foundational black and feminist scholarship in less-explored directions on the study of black eroticism. Contextualizing these scholars’ work with other literature on black sexuality, I demonstrate how black feminist thought reveals historical dynamics of “compulsory non/monogamy,” offering intersectional analysis of power that redefines the terms and terrain of “consensual nonmonogamy”—moving us toward a radical, anti-racist critique of compulsory forms of both monogamy and nonmonogamy.

While past studies have measured several indicators of relationship quality in relation to types of relationship agreement, most have not included polyamorous relationships, and have almost exclusively included samples of gay men. The purpose of this study was to address this gap by examining five dimensions of relationship quality and eight dimensions of relationship equity in a sexually diverse Canadian sample (N = 3463) across three types of relationship agreements (monogamous, open, and polyamorous). The data were collected online as part of a larger study. In order to compare relationship types on relationship dimensions, MANCOVAs were computed using age, relationship duration, cohabitation status, sex, sexual orientation, and an interaction term of sex and sexual orientation as control variables. High scores of relationship quality and equity were reported by the overall sample, and scores on all scales did not significantly differ by types of relationship agreement. Overall, these results strongly suggest that these types of relationship agreements are equally healthy viable options.

Jealousy in human relationships has been shown (Buss, et al., 1992) to be consistently dimorphic, with females tending to exhibit more jealousy about emotional infidelity and males tending to exhibit more jealousy about sexual infidelity. The evolutionary hypothesis offered to explain this dimorphism states, generally speaking, that emotions are behaviors that are developed and reinforced over time to adapt to environmental challenges. Jealousy, then, is evolutionarily framed as an adaptation to to meet the challenges of resource scarcity and paternity. The specifically non-jealous or anti-jealousy stance of polyamorous relationships is then considered, and it is speculated that this emerging non-jealous tendency in a minority of human relationships could be a novel evolutionary adaptation rather than a mere counter-evolutionary anomaly or outlier. In support of this speculation, I propose to test the hypothesis that jealousy-related attitudes and behaviors are consistently more frequent in monogamous as opposed to polyamorous individuals, and that conversely, specific instances of non-jealous attitudes and behaviors will be less frequent in monogamous individuals. A simple forced-choice survey design is proposed, and the possible implications of significant results is discussed.

Finding romance, love, and sexual intimacy is a central part of our life experience. Although people engage in romance in a variety of ways, alternatives to “the couple” are largely overlooked in relationship research. Scholars and the media have recently argued that the rules of romance are changing, suggesting that interest in consensual departures from monogamy may become popular as people navigate their long-term coupling. This study utilizes Google Trends to assess Americans’ interest in seeking out information related to consensual nonmonogamous relationships across a 10-year period (2006–2015). Using anonymous Web queries from hundreds of thousands of Google search engine users, results show that searches for words related to polyamory and open relationships (but not swinging) have significantly increased over time. Moreover, the magnitude of the correlation between consensual nonmonogamy Web queries and time was significantly higher than popular Web queries over the same time period, indicating this pattern of increased interest in polyamory and open relationships is unique. Future research avenues for incorporating consensual nonmonogamous relationships into relationship science are discussed.

Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre are well known for their openly non-monogamous relationship: something which is reflected upon in the many biographies which have been written about their lives. Clearly de Beauvoir and Sartre's existential thinking influenced their relationship philosophy, and their relational experience reflected back into their work, notably in de Beauvoir's fiction such as She Came to Stay and her work on gender such as The Second Sex. The themes of freedom and responsibility, relational conflict, objectification, and the possibility of mutual relationships, flow throughout their major philosophical works, notably Being and Nothingness (Sartre) and The Ethics of Ambiguity (de Beauvoir).

This chapter explores the forms of open non-monogamy which have emerged in recent years, including open relationships, swinging, and polyamory (multiple relationships), providing a brief overview of their history and key practices. These relationship forms will then be explored in the context of existential perspectives on relating and more recent theories of intersubjectivity. We examine the potentials, in monogamous, and non-monogamous modes of relating, for mutuality and the embracing of freedom (of self and other), as well as the limitations of this, and whether relationship structure – in itself – is enough to forge a different way of relating.

Sexism, heteronormativity and mononormativity are constitutively entangled, but to what extent does undoing one undo the others? Through a reading of HBO’s Big Love, a television series about a polygamous family that is conservative in every way except their plural marriage, this article argues that there are ways in which intimacy might be politically transgressive even as it reinforces gender and sexual norms. Expanding on the definition of ‘mononormativity’ through analogy to Berlant and Warner’s (1998) ‘heteronormativity’ it is argued that in order to do justice to the complexity of intimate politics we must attend to relational norms and their transgression.

This extended literature review explores non-monogamous relationships from the perspective of both current research and insights from the consensual nonmonogamous community. This covers both consensual non-monogamy and secret non-monogamy, but focuses more on the former, as this is both the lesser known and more complex.

It critiques the near absence of any substantive analysis of non-monogamies within Transactional Analysis. It presents a set of models from the research and from the community, and examines a number of TA models that can be adapted to help explore non-monogamies. It identifies issues that consensual non-monogamy clients can bring to therapy. These are illustrated in two case study vignettes.

Conclusions are drawn for both TA relationship counselling practice and for further research. A research proposal is outlined to examine the cultural beliefs of practicing TA therapists about non-monogamy.

In this paper, I argue that intimacy confining constraints— or a categorical restriction on having additional intimate relationships—is morally impermissible.Though some scholars believe that this problem attaches exclusively to monogamous relationships, I argue that it also applies to non-monogamous relationships—such as polyfidelitous relationships—as well. As this point requires a deconstruction of the juxtaposition that erroneously places monogamy and non- monogamy as binary opposites, this paper reveals a variegated and interpenetrating fi eld of intimate non- monogamous relationships, the existence of which gets us closer to realizing the transformative power contained within non-monogamous relationships.

Sex is dead and so is monogamous marriage. What will replace them? Read about alternative lifestyles (such as swinging), sexual preferences (such as bi- and homosexuality), sexual paraphilias (such as incest, fetishism, and pedophilia), and the role of malignant narcissism in the disintegration of relationships between men and women.

While past studies have measured several indicators of relationship quality in relation to types of relationship agreement, most have not included polyamorous relationships, and have almost exclusively included samples of gay men. The purpose of this study was to address this gap by examining five dimensions of relationship quality and eight dimensions of relationship equity in a sexually diverse Canadian sample (N = 3463) across three types of relationship agreements (monogamous, open, and polyamorous). The data were collected online as part of a larger study. In order to compare relationship types on relationship dimensions, MANCOVAs were computed using age, relationship duration, cohabitation status, sex, sexual orientation, and an interaction term of sex and sexual orientation as control variables. High scores of relationship quality and equity were reported by the overall sample, and scores on all scales did not significantly differ by types of relationship agreement. Overall, ...

Most social scientific work on intimate relationships has assumed a monogamous structure, or has considered anything other than monogamy only in the context of 'infidelity'. Yet, in recent years there has been a growing interest among researchers and the public in exploring various patterns of intimacy that involve open non-monogamy. This volume gathers contributions from academics, activists, and practitioners throughout the world to explore non-monogamous relationships. Featuring both empirical and theoretical pieces, contributors examine the history and cultural basis of various forms of non-monogamy, experiences of non-monogamous living, psychological understandings of relationship patterns, language and emotion, the discursive construction of mono-normativity as well as issues of race, class, disability, sexuality and gender. This volume will be of interest to academics and practitioners working in the social sciences and anyone who is seeking greater insight into the intricacies of non-monogamous relationships.

Increasingly, challengers to antipolygamy legislation have framed polyamory as a sexual orientation, arguing that some people are immutably predisposed toward forming multiple relationships. Drawing on a qualitative study of 40 bisexual women in Toronto, Canada, this article argues that polyamory and monogamy are better viewed as strategies of sexual expression rather than as immutable orientations. Such an approach accommodates identity shifts between monogamy and polyamory that enable women to manage and negotiate their visibility as bisexuals. Viewing monogamy and polyamory as strategic identities can help health care practitioners more accurately assess their clients’ needs and health risks.

This study contributes to the development of nascent bisexual theology by examining bisexual women’s lives in relation to the stereotype that bisexuals desire concurrent male and female partners.  Building on qualitative email interviews with forty bisexual women in the Greater Toronto Area, this thesis finds that monogamy and polyamory function as strategic identities.  If bisexual theology is to speak authentically to the needs of bisexual women, it must provide a critical analysis of these identities, understand and respond to their role in shaping communities, moral agency and theological knowledge.

What is love? Is it an uncontrollable emotion? Is it, instead, socially shaped, both an emotion and a social practice? Can the bonds of care and affection between humans and non-human animals be said to be on a par with parent-child relationships between humans? Do parents owe love to their children – and do mothers and fathers, respectively, owe it to different degrees? Do subversive weddings challenge normative ideals about love? What is the significance of love for the value of close personal or family relationships? All these questions and more are discussed in the articles included in this special issue. The contributors draw from a variety of disciplines including philosophy, sociology, political science, religious studies, and history, as well as from empirical work that they have undertaken in Canada, Belgium, Portugal, or Romania. From these different perspectives and experiences, each contribution addresses important questions about love and its relation to sexuality, monogamy, friendship, the family, parenthood, or society in general.

In this qualitative research, conducted on 30 gay-friendly, heterosexual, undergraduate men, we examine actual and hypothetical experiences of sexual threesomes, both with two women and one man (FFM), and two men and one woman (MMF). We show a cultural willingness for heterosexual men to engage in not only FFM threesomes, but also MMF threesomes. A year and a half into their university experience, seven of our participants had had at least one FFM threesome, and five of our participants had had at least one MMF threesome. We argue that this threesome experience is a component of cultural progression toward a more liberal, recreational culture of sexuality that encourages play and experimentation instead of a procreative model of sexuality. Thus, this research contributes to the growing body of literature showing that the cultural boundaries of heterosexuality are rapidly expanding for males, permitting more same-sex sexual contact without triggering the one-time-rule of homosexuality.

A key aspect of attachment functioning is the secure base, which empowers people to explore their environments, though some individuals do this more effectively than others. While most researchers have focused on adult attachment dynamics in terms of stress and threat (safe haven), we argue that concerted attention should also focus on relational processes in times of optimal functioning. In this paper, we introduce a new theoretical concept: secure base sexual exploration (or sexploration). We define this as the degree to which individuals are able to effectively explore multifaceted dimensions of sexuality (e.g., behaviors, identity) as a function of secure attachment dynamics. Put another way, we posit that interpersonal attachment security, which is a function of individual and dyadic factors, may meaningfully predict the degree to which individuals are comfortable with sexual exploration. In the first section of our paper, we outline core tenets of attachment theory, followed by an explanation of the secure base construct. We then explain how the secure base construct can be useful in conceptualizing individual differences in sexploration, followed by domain-specific sexual outcomes (e.g., behavior, identity) that may stem from sexploration. Embedded in this discussion is a new approach for researchers to examine these links.

From Monogramy to Polyamory: Social Perception of Nonmononormative Relationships
\
Summary
The article presents the results of research on social perception of five types of relationships (monogamous, polyamorous, sexually open, swinging and afflicted with infidelity). The results indicates that non-consensual infidelity is a subject to the strongest stigmatization, while there is a halo effect around monogamous choice, both on evaluation of traits related and not related with the quality of the relationship. Polyamory is assessed more positively than other types of
consensual non-monogamy. A man in all types of non-monogamous relationships is perceived as more satisfied than a woman, while the reverse effect is observed in a monogamous case.
Key words: consensual non-monogamy; polyamory; swinging; open relationship; stigmatization.