Open Marriage Is Not A Fad

— In defense of non-monogamy.

By Jenny Block

Monogamy Is Good, And It’s Here To Stay. I was leery about this 2008 piece the minute I saw the title. But as soon as I read it and saw the word “fad” used to describe the kind of relationship that I have been deliriously happy in for years (and the kind hundreds of other people I have met have been in for decades) I knew I was dealing with a classic case of fear and misunderstanding — a dangerous mix. I thought I might simply reply in the comments section, but I quickly realized that I had way too much ground to cover. So, below I have gone section by section in response to Ms. Cline’s piece.

“Why aren’t you in an open relationship yet? Carla Bruni Sarkozy, wife of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, famously “prefers polygamy and polyandry.” Reveal magazine quoted Will Smith as saying that he and his wife Jada Pinkett-Smith allow each other extra-marital dalliances. Oprah did a segment on open marriages. Both YourTango contributor Jenny Block and Village Voice columnist Tristan Taormino have books out on open relationships. All of this talk of free love is enough to make chicks who prefer old-fashioned monogamy feel a bit, well, old-fashioned. But if history can teach us anything, the open relationship bandwagon will come and go, which is a good thing because most women still benefit from and prefer monogamy.”

Cline’s opening question immediately gave me pause. This is the tone of someone who feels either uncomfortable or threatened. Surely no one is asking Cline, or anyone else, why they’re not in an open relationship, which me wonder if perhaps Cline is questioning herself. I have never suggested, and would never suggest, that anyone in a monogamous relationship is old-fashioned, and I have repeatedly assured my readers that I have no problem with honest, intentional monogamy. I have been told that to those on the outside, people in the open relationship community can come across as a smug group who think they’re more highly evolved than the monogamous. I am saddened to hear that, but it’s all the more reason that reading and writing on this topic is so important.

The truth is, it’s the lying that is a racket. And, if history can teach us anything, which surely it can, it’s that open relationships aren’t going anywhere. They’ve been around since the dawn of time. If it seems like they come and go, that’s only because the press coverage wavers, not the relationships themselves. The fact that Tristan and I both had books come out on the subject this past June certainly brought it into the public eye, hence the appearance of a suddenly new popularity.

I am not sure what Cline is referring to when she says “most women” as “most” of the women I have spoken to and researched neither prefer nor feel particularly benefited by monogamy. Quite the opposite is true. Many women feel caged in a relationship where their body is “owned” by their partner. Monogamy doesn’t necessarily result in that dynamic but it certainly does at times. That’s where open relationships can be very rewarding for women: controlling one is no longer the cornerstone of the relationship. Instead, love trust and intimacy are.

“Why? Women still generally do more work in relationships than men do and openness requires even more diligence than a regular relationship;”

That certainly is the stereotype. Whether or not it is the reality is unclear, but the fact that it is misogynistic is unarguable. I have trouble seeing how openness requires more diligence than a “regular” relationship. First, it begs the question of what “regular” is. Cheating is so common that, in some ways, I’d consider it more normal than true monogamy. Keeping one’s partner from straying — even though their biology is driving them to seek multiple partners — requires all the assiduousness one can muster. I no longer have to be conscientious in that way, but I am as tireless when it comes to making sure the people I’m involved with know how much I love them — and you don’t get a pass on that just because you’re in a monogamous relationship.  Being with another person requires attention. Providing that attention should be a part of the joy of that relationship, not part of the burden.

“Women are taught to care more about relationships and risk more for them than men, so non-monogamy raises the stakes more for us.”

I’m unclear here about what it is that women “risk more” than men. The stakes aren’t any higher in open relationships than they are in closed ones; they’re the same. We risk our hearts—whenever we love someone. What’s the point if we don’t take that risk? And if the risk is being alone, well, I think the divorce rate proves that “committing” to a monogamous relationship does not guarantee you anything.

“And, despite today’s female open relationship proponents, it’s men who typically initiate and prefer non-monogamy.”

This is simply untrue, although I would be interested to review any historically and scientifically significant proof that shows otherwise.

“The recent rash of high-profile cheaters (Elliot Spitzer, John Edwards, David Patterson, Larry Craig) has shown monogamy in an ugly light. People yearn for… variety, and now that we live longer than ever, it’s unrealistic to imagine a couple staying together for fifty years without a single affair. And in fact, statistics show twenty percent of men and thirteen percent of women cheat on their spouse.”

Exactly. So why not be honest with your partner about your needs instead of subscribing to a societal convention that is very young and that has proven to be highly unworkable? Cline is right when she says that these cases reveal monogamy in an unflattering light. So why not take advantage of that view and use it as an opportunity to take stock of the reality, as opposed to the fantasy, of what monogamy is and when it does and doesn’t work?

“But open relationships are not the solution, says Ayala Pines, psychologist and author of Romantic Jealousy, because jealousy and envy are just as hardwired as infidelity. Only a third of monogamous marriages survive cheating because of jealousy and a lingering sense of betrayal, says Pines. And the success rate for open relationships is not any better for similar reasons. “In my experience with open relationships,” she says, “the couple goes back to monogamy or else to illicit affairs. Or, it ends in divorce.”

Jealousy and envy have not been scientifically proven to be hard-wired. It is more likely that they are learned, based upon the study of non-Western cultures who live decidedly non-monogamous lifestyles. And as for the statistic of one-third, well, show me an argument and I’ll give you a statistic. As to Pines’ experience with open relationships, people who go to see a psychologist are likely going because they have a problem. Pines doesn’t see the people who are in happy open relationships. My question for Pines would be, what percentage of the closed couples that she treats end up happily back together?

“Another reason why open relationships don’t work in practice for a lot of women is because they’re simply too time-consuming. The block is upfront about the work involved in juggling a husband and a girlfriend.”

Again, I can’t see not pursuing a fulfilling relationship because it requires some of your time. All relationships take time. Everything worth doing takes time. How about hobbies? People are willing to put in the work to train for a marathon. How about careers? People are willing to spend four whole years to get a degree. That’s like saying, “I’d love to follow my dreams, but it’s just too much trouble.”

“An excerpt of her book on Huffington Post, Life In An Open Marriage: The Four (Not-So-Easy) Steps prompted one HuffPo commenter to say, “I’m exhausted just reading about all the ‘work’ and never-ending ‘communication’ about feelings, situations, jealousy, worry, etc. It all sounds like much more effort than it’s worth (IMO).” Likewise, Taormino’s Opening Up: A Guide to Creating and Sustaining Open Relationships is an intimidating 300 pages, in which the kind of person who is successful at non-monogamy is described as someone committed to knowing themselves “on a deep level,” a process she says might include “psychotherapy and counseling, reading, writing, journaling, blogging, attending workshops and peer support groups, meditation, and various spiritual practices.” While the idea of openness may be appealing to some women, it’s hard to imagine many of us finding the time to juggle a second relationship. Especially those of us with careers and children.”

I have a career and children. All of the people I know in open relationships have careers and/or children. And shouldn’t we all want to know ourselves on a deeper level? Good strong relationships require that. Otherwise, what’s the point? What do you get out of a relationship if you only have a surface understanding of yourself and your partner? Relationships between any number of people — good ones anyway — require attention and care. Not wanting to deal with “all that trouble” is a sad commentary about the value one places on enjoying truly satisfying, happy, healthy relationships.

“Open relationships are being billed as the wave of the future, but they’ve gone in and out of style every few decades, never becoming more than a fringe movement.”

Fringe is a tough word. At one time hippies were fringe but nowadays, not so much. The same goes for punks and guys who invented personal computers in their garages. Being part of a vanguard group doesn’t make what you’re doing wrong. Open relationships are far from being at their beginning stages, just as they are far from being unrecognized by the larger population. In the last six months alone, either myself, the topic, my book, or some combination thereof have been in or on The New York Times, the UK Observer, the Tyra Banks Show, Fox television, the London Observer, Huffingtonpost, the San Francisco Chronicle. I can’t imagine how something with that sort of media coverage is fringe. Isn’t that how the saying goes, once the media has it, whatever “it” is is no longer “cool”? I have never been more excited to no longer be cool.

“According to Susan Squire, author of I Don’t: A Contrarian History of Marriage, “there have been experiments of mate-swapping in the 19th century and again in the 70s and a few Utopian societies, but it never seems to stick. It doesn’t work or only works for a short period. Then, history cycles, marriage cycles, and everything repeats itself.”

As I mentioned earlier, I would argue that the cycle is the popularity of talking about open marriage rather than the popularity of actually having them. Otherwise, where did all of these people in open marriages go? I know a wealth of couples who have been in open marriages for more than thirty years. They might not have been talking about it because of prejudices like those presented in Cline’s essay, but they were still living their happy, open lives.

“The last time open marriages (often known as polyandry, free love, friends with benefits, et al)”

Forgive me for breaking in mid-sentence, but “polyandry, free love, friends with benefits, et al” are not the same things. At all. Polyandry refers to when a man has multiple wives. Free love wasn’t (isn’t) necessarily about intimacy within committed relationships. The same goes for friends with benefits. Open marriage refers to, well, open marriage: two people are married and have the freedom to pursue additional physical and/or emotional relationships (the latter of which would then imply a polyamorous relationship).

“were in vogue during the revolution of the late sixties and seventies. In 1972, the landmark book Open Marriage documented Nena and George O’Neill’s attempts to redefine marriage and open up their relationship to other partners.”

The book Open Marriage offers only one chapter about intimacy and the authors only peripherally mention spouses pursuing other partners. O’Neill’s definition of open marriage was more about opening oneself up to the world and not focusing on being a couple and nothing more. Interestingly, that is still the best marriage advice around. Have your friends, your hobby, your career. Be a partner to your spouse. But don’t become defined by his or her existence and your relationship with him or her.

“It was a runaway bestseller and, like today, promoted the impression that open marriages were the way of the future. By 1977, Nena O’Neill had published The Marriage Premise, which argued that fidelity was not such a bad thing after all. Squire herself got caught up in what she calls “the five minutes of open relationships” in the seventies. In her first marriage, she says, “We did this thing where we had to tell each other but we could [be with] whoever we wanted. Did it work? No. I remember him calling me to tell me he was drinking with some woman, and saying ‘I’m going to go sleep with some woman, do you mind?’ Of course, I minded. When faced with that, I wasn’t into it. And the reverse was true as well.”

A personal antidote is interesting. But it certainly doesn’t prove anything except that an open relationship with that partner wasn’t for Squire. Pines brings up another X factor of open relationships. Despite all the progress of feminism, she says “women are still socialized to care more about relationships and desire commitment more than men.” Just consider the multi-billion dollar wedding industry and the success of happily-ever-after rom-coms and shows like Sex and the City. Women want weddings, not necessarily marriages. It does make one ponder the old question of whether life imitates art or art imitates life.

“We are also more likely to devote our lives to children, family, and spouse.”

Only because society drills into our heads that we’re supposed to. What would women be like if no one told them incessantly how they were supposed to be? There’s no way to know. No way to know.

“In short, the stakes are higher if there’s to be an emotional fallout from an open relationship.”

Why? We have our own money and our careers. We shouldn’t be defining ourselves by our spouses. The problem is not with open relationships, but with continuing to tell women that they need a man, that they have to be mothers to be fulfilled, that there is one right way to do things, and that everything else is just a “fad.” If we keep telling this tale, it will most certainly continue to prevail. But what if we drop the whole ownership thing, the whole who cares if science says we’re not monogamous, let’s demand it anyway because one group of people (read: the church) says we should and live like thinking human beings who choose lifestyles because they work for us and our partners and the community at large. Keep in mind that marriage has a 50% failure rate and infidelity is rampant. If we went by those statistics, one might conclude that it’s heterosexual monogamous marriage that’s a fad. 

“In Woody Allen’s ménage a trois flick Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Javier Bardem’s character is flagrantly trying to bed three women. The women agree, but Vicky falls in love with him and is tormented. Christina agrees to merely be the extra “salt” in the relationship between Bardem and jealous ex-wife Maria Elena. Bardem is unflappable. Everyone in the theater laughs knowingly—for Bardem, it’s about [intimacy]. But the women always seem to have a little too much invested, a little too much to lose.”

This is a movie written by a man. Not real life. A movie. Truth be told, I wasn’t at all convinced at the end of the film that Christina wouldn’t pursue open relationships in the future. This one simply was no longer working for her. It makes me sad to think that viewers would perceive as novel a woman making a choice based on her own needs.

“And this isn’t just the stuff of a Woody Allen fantasy. Men are typically the ones who initiate open relationships. According to a poll on Oprah.com, seven percent of women and fourteen percent of men say they are in an open relationship. The gender gap is due partially to the habits of gay men, who are more likely than women or straight men to be in non-monogamous arrangements. But, it’s also that “men tend to prefer open relationships more than women do,” says Pines, who has decades of clinical and research experience on the subject, “because their preference for casual [intimacy] far exceeds women’s.”

That is, if women are telling the truth on those surveys, which researchers have said time and again they are not because of the stigma of admitting to being in or wanting an open relationship. Open relationship boards, events, and organizations are filled with women. I can’t see why that would be difficult to accept. It doesn’t affect those women — or men for that matter — who want to remain in closed relationships. Just as the legality of gay marriage doesn’t affect the state of heterosexual marriage. There is no need to invalidate another person’s life to validate your own.

“It’s intriguing that Block and Taormino, two of today’s loudest advocates for open relationships, are women.”

Why isn’t our existence — and popularity — proof enough that there are women in the lead? I don’t follow the logic. First, the argument is that there are very few women who want open relationships so they must be a fad or fringe. But then she says two women are leading the charge. What should one conclude from that?

“Historically, it’s been men who’ve advocated for polyandry and men who’ve benefited. “In the ancient world, men were never expected to be faithful,” says Squire. Women were severely punished for extra-marital affairs primarily because it threatened patrilineal culture, where the paternity of a child would be in question if the woman strayed. In the last three or four centuries, the Lutheran marriage model of fidelity has become the standard, which has given women a more equal stake in romantic partnerships.”

But what about all of the matriarchal societies? Surely it isn’t only Western cultures that count in this discussion?

“Sure, some women can tinker with this arrangement and come out on top, but for many of us there’s a sense that this is part of the battle of the sexes we’re not winning.”

Exactly. Open relationships work for some people, monogamy works for others. This isn’t a competition. Not for me anyway. They both can — and do — work. The decision is about individuality consciousness and desire. How do you want this world to work? If there’s only one way to have a relationship, how long before we’re back to only one “right” religion or one way for the genders to behave or one way to look?

“So if you’re feeling like a fuddy-duddy for not wanting two lovers, remember this open relationship thing is a fad, and, as history has shown us, this too shall pass. While it may seem like non-monogamy is feminism’s natural next step, the fact is that women largely prefer one partner, and we enjoy putting time and emotion into our primary relationship. There’s not enough reason for us to change our ideas about what makes a satisfying love life, just to get on board with a time-consuming relationship model.”

Everyone is allowed their own opinion. This is Cline’s and that’s fine. But it is imperative that it not be taken as fact, because fact it is not. The truth is that the model of a romantic, monogamous, “you complete me” marriage is little more than a hundred years old. And how old is civilization? Maybe heterosexual, monogamous marriage will end up being the fad in the long run. We don’t and can’t know. But, regardless, the only thing I advocate for is honesty and respect. Be honest with your partner. Respect the ways others choose to live even if that way might be different from yours. And if you’re feeling like a “fuddy-duddy,” perhaps it’s time to reevaluate your own life, not the lives of others. As my dad always says, “No one ever cares about what we’re doing nearly as much as we think we do.”

Complete Article HERE!

The Ethical Slut turns 80

— A talk with poly fairy grandmother Dossie Easton

‘The Ethical Slut’ co-author Dossie Easton.

She co-wrote the book on living and loving openly. Here, she speaks to us about her decades of experience.

By Caitlin Donohue

Twenty-something me would have been verklempt: I was set to interview Dossie Easton, one of the co-authors of The Ethical Slut. The venerable sex and relationship therapist, educator, and self-proclaimed “SM diva” had just celebrated her 80th birthday (she celebrated by going to see Taylor Mac at Cal Performances, I would learn) and was due for some gassing up when it came to her lasting influence on sex education. 48hills was only too happy to oblige—we adore a slutty Bay Area legend.

Easton and her longtime co-author and lover Janet W. Hardy’s iconic book, originally published in 1997 and now on its third edition, broke onto the collective consciousness as the definitional text for those interested in living a life beyond monogamy. The duo went on to pen a passel of tomes for tarts: The New Bottoming Book (and its top-friendly sister volume), When Someone You Love is Kinky, and Radical Ecstasy: S/M Journeys to Transcendence among them.

But if you’re of a certain age and queer/polyamorous proclivity, The Ethical Slut was the book that has doubtlessly spent time on your bedside table, probably purchased on the recommendation of a crush whose language you were desperate to learn. Its impacts on our lexicon are undeniable, not the least of which being the reclamation of that titular term for those who bed without shame. Do you know what a “primary partner” is or what “compersion” feels like? Did you ever attend a SlutWalk? Conversely, was the media’s obsession with Jada Pinkett Smith’s entanglement truly baffling for you? Have you been driven to distraction by an irresponsible lover who willfully misuses the language of ethical non-monogamy? You likely have TES to thank.

Certainly, the book’s success changed Easton’s own dating life forever. “For some people it creates distance, because they get embarrassed,” says the curly-headed sex sage, Zooming in from her longtime home in Marin County. “I can understand that, because I get embarrassed around famous people myself.” But far more often: “People like me in advance, which is nice.” Indeed, who wouldn’t like a published author well-versed in lesbian fisting party protocol?

Of course, seismic cultural change has impacted our take on the pair’s seminal work. Easton was open in her discussion of how time has shaped views on The Ethical Slut, and the book itself.

“We started using less gendered language by the time we got to the second edition,” the educator, who continues to teach online seminars on navigating, tells me. “It was a consciousness thing that moved further and further for us.” Cursory sections on online dating and being BIPOC and poly were also added in later editions—two areas which Easton admits hypothetical further editions could further explore. But staying on top of emancipatory language around sex and gender does entail a steep learning curve. More recent editions of the book did still seem to rule out sexual coercion among gay men and center cis folk. Easton mentions that she saw gendered terms as necessary for describing situations in the book like those involving “somebody right after a baby was born”.  

There is no denying, however, that we have here a Bay Area sex education institution. Easton tells me she dropped out of “mainstream culture” when she was 18, discovering that psychedelics brought her closer to the spirituality she found lacking when she was growing up with a Roman Catholic family in small-town Massachusetts.

“By the time the ’60s rolled around, I was doing volunteer work.” Easton recalls. “I volunteered during the Summer of Love at the Haight Ashbury Medical Clinic, things like that, doing psychedelic crisis intervention. I didn’t have a license to practice then, but I volunteered at places like the battered woman’s shelter in the ’70s, and at San Francisco Sex Information, which is a wonderful switchboard that still exists. You can call up and have a trained volunteer answer your questions about sex, isn’t that nice? It’s celebrating its 50th anniversary sometime soon.”

The Ethical Slut’ co-authors Dossie Easton and Janet W. Hardy

Shortly after having her daughter, she left the last monogamous relationship she’d ever have, famously making a vow to forever live the poly life. Easton raised her kid (now 55) largely in communal living situations, crediting bathhouse-loving gay male housemates—who were at times deprived of contact with kids, in an era when the LGBTQs could little hope to be approved as adoptive parents—for teaching her that the s-word, at least, could be applied to all genders. To this day, she is a huge believer in the power of extended chosen families, particularly for people whose sexual orientation or practices places them outside the nuclear family industrial complex.

As advanced as her San Francisco community was, even by the late ‘80s when Easton attended graduate school to become a certified therapist, academia still had no idea what to do with non-monogamists. When they found about that it was a lived interest of hers, teachers would interrogate Easton about whether it was really possible for individuals to be happy outside of one-on-one relationships. “Then I found out that the professor who questioned me was well-known for coming onto other people’s wives. I was like, you’ve got to be kidding me,” she smirks.

Happily, times have changed somewhat and, the octogenarian reports, there are certain joys of being a slut elder. Easton hasn’t had a primary partner since 2010—she says she’s been single for roughly half of her adult life—but when she fell and hurt her elbow last year, recovery was distinctly and joyfully poly, with a community of past and present lovers and friends signing up to care for their fallen friend. “There was somebody at my house 24/7 for the first three weeks,” Easton says.

Another heartwarming ethical-slut-at-80-story: Though Easton split with a younger, former primary partner years ago due to the partner wanting to have kids, the two stayed in touch, with Easton eventually participating in the person’s touching “regeneration ceremony” and subsequently gaining two darling “fairy grandsons.” “I want people to understand that even when a breakup is really dreadful, you’re not required to somehow shut off that corner of your life and throw it in the trash. You can build something else,” she reflects.

1997 first edition cover of ‘The Ethical Slut’

If there’s one thing all of us who read The Ethical Slut recall, it’s the book relentlessly optimistic tone. It made you feel like this new world, in which we all merrily explore our sexual and gender identities, work on our jealousy and enjoy a plethora of partners should we get the hankering, is here, if you want it. But sadly, I write these lines in 2024. One of the United States’ woefully few major political parties has the imperilment of trans kids and racially-biased erasure of reproductive rights high atop its list of legislative priorities. Does Easton still hold with Martin Luther King Jr. that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice”?

“I do,” she declares. “I was a teenager in the ’50s, for heaven’s sakes! […] It’s really scary, it really is, but they’re not going to be able to put the rabbit back in the hat. The information is out.”

If that sounds pat, know that she’s committed to ongoing efforts; Easton says she has “three manuscripts nagging at me”, one of them a vignette-laden journal that prompts readers to analyze their own needs and desires when it comes to sex and relationships. It reminds me of a story she told of an early revelation she had as a teen; that society did not have the right words for such a fundamental, fun part of human existence. In part, her career has been a mission to change just that.

“How do you talk about sex in a way that’s delightful?” asks the promiscuous fairy grandmother. “Wouldn’t that be dear?”

Complete Article HERE!

What Is “Natural” for Human Sexual Relationships?

— A biological and anthropological researcher explains how humans’ diverse ways of mating might have evolved.


Members of a pro-polyamory group march in Toronto’s 2018 LGBTQ Pride Parade.

By Rui Diogo

Marrying more than one person constitutes a crime across most of the Americas and Europe. But in countries including Mali, Gambia, and Nigeria, more than a quarter of the population lives in polygamous households.

Survey the sex lives of Homo sapiens, and you’ll find couples, throuples, harems, and other arrangements of lovers. Fidelity, adultery, and ethically non-monogamous unions. How could one species have evolved myriad ways to mate? Concerning sex, what is natural for us humans?

A green book cover features two images at the top: a painting of a person and a photo of two adults and two children gathered in a forest. Beneath the images, large white text reads, “Meaning of Life, Human Nature, and Delusions.” Smaller blue text reads, “Rui Diogo” and “How Tales About Love, Sex, Races, Gods, and Progress Affect Our Lives and Earth’s Splendor.”

As an evolutionary biologist and anthropologist, I am often asked that question. The answer is complex. It also goes to the heart of the nature versus nurture debate, a topic that I have been discussing for several years, including in my latest book, Meaning of Life, Human Nature, and Delusions.

As discussed in that book, the scientific and historical evidence suggests that our earliest human ancestors, after we split from the chimpanzee lineage some 7 million years ago, were mainly polygamous. Individuals had various sexual partners at the same time. Fast forward to today, and humans exhibit diverse mating arrangements due to a greater influence of culture and tradeoffs between sexual desire, comfort, and jealousy.

how humans mate

Numerous lines of evidence contribute to my understanding of human mating habits.

As a biologist, I turn to the sex lives of nonhuman primates: Most species appear polygamous, including our closest relatives, chimpanzees. For these apes, both males and females have several hetero- and homosexual partners.

Fossils indicate the earliest hominins—the evolutionary branch leading to humans after its split from chimps—resembled upright walking apes. Considering these first human ancestors looked and acted like apes in many ways, it’s likely they mated polygamously.

But putting on my anthropologist’s hat and observing humans today, I notice a considerable variety of mating systems. Different cultures enforce or reinforce very different sexual practices. For instance, in some regions of Tibet, a woman can live with several husbands (polyandry). In countries such as Pakistan, men typically live with more than one wife (polygyny).

Across dozens of Indigenous Amazonian societies, pregnant women and those trying to conceive have sex with different men based on the idea of “shared or partible paternity.” According to people who hold this belief, semen from multiple fathers contribute to a developing fetus. A woman might have sex with the community’s fastest runner and best hunter to pass on these desirable traits to her child.

So how did mating habits evolve from our polygamous primate past to our variable human present?

Cultural differences can overtake biological foundations, as numerous historical cases evidence. For example, ancient texts indicate that men imposed monogamy upon women—but not necessarily on themselves—when agriculture emerged in several regions around the globe. As historian Stephanie Coontz has argued, farming lifestyles created notions of private property, which extended in some places to greater subjugation of women. In the early farming societies of ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, wedding rings, worn by the wife, symbolized that she was owned by her husband. Patriarchs from the Bible’s Old Testament such as Jacob and David had multiple wives.

TRADEOFFS AND CULTURE

This brings us to the nature versus nurture debate, which is crucial for understanding love, sex, and marriage. A person’s natural biological drives may differ from behaviors they’ve absorbed through nurture, or their upbringing in a particular culture. (The nature/nurture debate itself proves to be problematic because, for social animals like humans, biology and culture intertwine.)

But, as I see it, monogamous marriage is mostly a cultural imposition, associated with three conflicting drives: sexual desire, comfort, and jealousy.

Sexual desire, grown from our polygamous primate roots, makes people want many partners or at least sexual novelty. I suggest that is why some married partners try to introduce novelty by wearing sexy underwear or otherwise changing routines. Providing a somewhat quantitative measure, studies have shown that changing sexual partners in swing clubs or while watching pornography often reduces a penis’ recovery (“refractory”) period between orgasm and the next erection.

However, two other emotions also play key roles in shaping our mating habits. One is jealousy, which derives from territoriality, a trait observed in most primates. Monogamy can diminish jealousy but may leave one sexually desiring more.

In some cases, those with power have enjoyed reduced jealousy and many sexual partners. For example, certain rulers have maintained harems with dozens of wives, but those women were expected to only sleep with their shared husband. Similarly, sexist religious narratives have been used to justify men keeping several wives but not the opposite.

The third critical emotion is comfort or familiarity. If, say, you develop cancer at age 70, you probably would want someone by your side who loves you—a monogamous mate. That desire for familiarity may not be met in cases of polygamy, in which one person has several sexual partners without love necessarily being involved.

A person wearing an ornate red headpiece and cape stands beside a balding person in a plaid suit jacket and gray pants. Other people wearing decorative beaded head and waist bands hold umbrellas and dance behind them.

Recently, it seems polyamory has gained steam in countries such as the U.S. and Canada. This arrangement recognizes that people may have a desire for many partners but concedes to some religious and philosophical narratives: for instance, Plato’s argument that sex without love is a sin or less noble. With polyamory, the idea is, “yes I do have sex with many, but I love them all.” And those partners also love others.

I see polyamory as an evolutionary rare and historically recent form of mating. Those who partake probably satisfy their desires for multiple mates and comfort/familiarity. But they may still suffer jealousy when their beloveds openly love others.

When it comes to love and mating, there are no perfect solutions. Each type of relationship balances sexual desire, comfort, and jealousy in different measures, subject to cultural influences. Some trends indicate that monogamous marriage is falling out of fashion for younger people in places such as the U.S. But there’s no reason to think that loveless polygamy, or love-flush polyamory, will overtake other arrangements.

Likely, humans in diverse societies will continue to love and mate in many different ways.

Complete Article HERE!

Here’s how to tell if a throuple might be right for you

— It’s not the same as an open relationship.

By and

The beautiful thing about non-monogamy is that it can take on many, varied forms: A non-monogamous dynamic can look like one polyamorous person having multiple romantic and sexual partners, or several individuals all in a non-hierarchical relationship together. One term you might’ve heard is ‘throuple,’ or triad, which describes a certain kind of committed relationship structure between three people.

Not to be mistaken for an open relationship (where people in a relationship have sex with people who are not their partner) or a threesome (sex between three people), a throuple is a balanced, consensual, and committed relationship. And while the term might be new to you, there’s nothing new or unusual about the concept, says Ann Rosen Spector, PhD, a clinical psychologist in Philadelphia. ‘It’s totally possible to be in love with more than one person at one time,’ she says.

So, what is a throuple, exactly—and what should you know if you’re interested in being in one? Read on for the full lowdown, according to therapists and social workers who work with polyamorous folks.

What is a throuple relationship?

A throuple, or triad, is a balanced, consensual, and committed relationship between three people. ‘What it means is that each person is in a relationship with another—it’s a three-way relationship,’ says Carolanne Marcantonio, LCSW, an AASECT-certified sex therapist with Wise Therapy in New York.

Like a couple, or a relationship between two people, the members of a throuple might have a ‘closed’ relationship, or an ‘open’ one. In some cases, ‘one person could be open to dating others, but another person in the triad isn’t,’ Marcantonio adds. ‘It really just depends.’

Different people in different dynamics might have their own definition and rules for the three-way relationship, so if you meet someone in a triad (or you’re about to join one!), it’s always a good idea to clarify what being in a throuple means to them.

What’s the difference between a throuple and other forms of polyamory?

Anything that isn’t a monogamous, exclusive, two-person relationship falls under the non-monogamy umbrella, says Anna Dow, LMFT, a therapist with Vast Love. And there are infinite types of polyamorous relationships, adds Marcantonio: ‘The sky’s the limit.’

Here are a few more polyamory-related words to know:

  • Quad: Four people who are in a committed relationship with each other
  • Polycule: A network of individuals who are all in relationships with each other
  • Kitchen table polyamory: A network of individuals who are in relationships with each other; if someone new is brought into this dynamic, they must generally get along with the rest of the group (think: feel comfortable sitting together at a large kitchen table)
  • Parallel polyamory: When a polyamorous person has multiple partners who don’t really interact with each other (essentially, the opposite of kitchen table polyamory)
  • Polyfidelity: When a throuple, quad, or larger polycule are ‘closed’ and do not see people outside of their group

Why might someone want to be in a throuple?

In some cases, a couple might meet a third person, become interested in them, and decide to bring that person into their relationship, says Spector.

In other instances, someone might know they’d like to join an existing couple, and seek out this kind of relationship dynamic. ‘If someone is oriented towards knowing that they can love more than one person responsibly, and if they feel like they can enter a relationship with an existing couple—and there’s chemistry, and connection between both and everyone agrees that they’d all like to be dating together—wonderful,’ says Marcantonio.

‘Being in a healthy throuple requires consistent communication and trust’

Aside from the joy of getting to date two people you like (or love), being in a throuple can help you get all your needs met, adds Spector. Think about it like this: When you have a third person involved, chances are, you’ll expose yourself and your original partner to qualities that both of you may want but can’t offer each other.

If you feel like you’re fully ready and wanting to add a third, Spector suggests letting your current partner know by gauging their interest. You can say something like: ‘I’d like to invite someone else into our relationship. How would you feel about having X join us and becoming a throuple?’

What are some tips for being in a healthy throuple?

Just like in any kind of relationship, being in a healthy throuple requires consistent communication and trust. ‘It’s the same as a monogamous relationship—the only difference is, it’ll be happening with two other folks,’ says Marcantonio.

However, there are some specific things you’ll want to watch out for, per relationship therapists:

1. Make sure you set ground rules first.

Different triads have different preferences, needs, and boundaries. Some examples of questions you’ll want to discuss, according to Marcantonio: ‘If everyone is open to all having other partners outside the triad, what does cheating look like? Do we all tell each other and have complete transparency when we’re talking to someone on the app, when we’re planning something, when we’ve had sex?’

Aside from discussions about sex and dating outside of the throuple, you’ll want to talk about your own dynamic as a trio, too, adds Spector. Would you prefer to only have sex as a throuple, for example, or is it okay for two people to have sex without the third?

‘It really depends on the triad and how they would like to set up the rules,’ says Jennifer Schneider, LICSW, LCSW, a psychotherapist specializing in LGBTQIA+ clients and those who identify as polyamorous or ethically non-monogamous. ‘It may be that a throuple sits down with each other and actually spends a few hours hammering out what might be relationship agreements.’

2. Continue to communicate.

People’s needs can fluctuate over time. So, continued communication is important, says Marcantonio. Spector recommends setting regular check-in times with your partners—and also checking in on your own needs, too.

3. And be sure you’re communicating *directly*, too.

One of the biggest issues a throuple might face is triangulation, says Marcantonio. ‘Triangulation in a relationship is when there’s one person who avoids directly interacting, usually with the person they have a conflict with,’ she explains. ‘So instead, they use the third person to confide in, to talk to.’

This can inadvertently put one person in the middle, Marcantonio adds. It can happen in friend groups, family dynamics, and—of course—romantic relationships that involve more than two people. So, if you have an issue or frustration with one of your partners, make sure you’re talking to them directly.

4. Get comfortable with any feelings of jealousy that might crop up.

It’s a common misconception that polyamorous folks don’t deal with jealousy. But, in fact, they can and do, says Schneider. It’s a natural human emotion. ‘It does take a lot of self-awareness and reflection to be in a poly relationship, because you will have feelings that come up that you need to sit with,’ Marcantonio adds.

If you find yourself feeling twinges of envy, Marcantonio recommends ‘staying curious’ and digging into the root of the issue. Is this something you can navigate on your own? Is this something you’d like to discuss with your partners? Did something trigger this emotion? These can be tough questions to work through, so if you’re struggling, you might want to check out a resource like The Jealousy Workbook by Kathy Labriola, which is chock-full of tools and exercises for people in polyamorous ‘ships.

What are some of the myths about throuples?

1. They’re purely sexual relationships.

When some people hear ‘throuple,’ they might hear ‘threesome.’ But this dynamic signifies an emotional, intimate relationship between three people. They go on dates together, have deep conversations together, and confide in one another.

‘It’s not all about sex,’ says Marcantonio. ‘It’s people who really uniquely enjoy having deep, intimate connections that go beyond sex.’

2. You have to have a certain sexuality, or be a certain gender, to be in one.

Throuples can be made up of people of any gender identity and any sexual orientation who choose to be together, Spector says.

‘Pop culture depicts them as primarily female-female-male threesomes in an imbalanced way that often fetishises the relationship structure,’ adds Dow. ‘In reality, however, throuples are just typical relationships comprised of people of any genders. And like all relationships, each one has its own set of benefits and challenges.’

3. They’re not natural.

News flash: throuples, quads, and other forms of polyamory are nothing new. Marcantonio recommends checking out the book Sex at Dawn by Christopher Ryan for further reading on the history of non-monogamous relationships. ‘We were much more communal many, many decades ago,’ she adds.

Ultimately, being in a throuple might not be for everyone—as humans, we all have different needs and preferred relationship structures. ‘Some people are more wired for monogamy, and that’s what they like and want. Others are able to do poly; they might be more wired for that, and that works great,’ Marcantonio says. ‘There’s no one ‘natural’ way to have a relationship.’

Meet the experts: Ann Rosen Spector, PhD, is a clinical psychologist in Philadelphia. Anna Dow, LMFT, is a therapist who specializes in non-monogamy at Vast Love. Carolanne Marcantonio, LCSW, is an AASECT-certified sex therapist with Wise Therapy in New York. Jennifer Schneider, LICSW, LCSW, is a psychotherapist specializing in LGBTQIA+ clients and those who identify as polyamorous or ethically non-monogamous.

Complete Article HERE!

When my partner was in the hospital, I missed his ex.

— Polyamory has only made my family stronger.

Alex Alberto (not pictured) says that through polyamory, their family has become more resilient.

By

  • Alex Alberto (they/them) is a queer and polyamorous storyteller who lives in Upstate New York.
  • The following is an adapted excerpt from their memoir “Entwined: Essays on Polyamory and Creating Home,” which is available for preorder (out February 19).
  • “Entwined” tells the story of Alberto’s decade-long polyamorous journey toward a new kind of family.

My partner entered the hospital room in a blue gown, his clothes stuffed in a clear plastic bag.

“You left the back untied!” I said, with a forced chuckle.

“Oh, they see hairy butts all day long,” Don replied. “Plus, most of their patients aren’t as sexy as me…”

Standing in the doorway, he pulled his gown up and lifted his thigh, toes seductively pointed on the floor. I rose from the chair, smiled, and snapped a picture of him. I knew he was trying to set a mood that meant this wasn’t a big deal. In the five years we’d been together, I’d pictured him dying or falling seriously ill hundreds, maybe thousands of times.

The author's partner, Don, while in the hospital.
The author’s partner, Don, while in the hospital.

I’ve always been worried that something would happen to Don

I’d always imagined it would be around his 51st birthday, the age my father was when he had a stroke that left him paralyzed and unable to speak. I’d had intrusive thoughts about all my loved ones suddenly dying or getting sick ever since. Every time I’d voice my fears, Don patiently held me and said he’d live healthily for a very, very long time. But here he was, at 40, about to undergo heart surgery.

While Don was in the operating room, I sat on the blue vinyl chair in his office, grateful that his research center was in the hospital and that I had a quiet place to cry. I had a pile of memoirs and hours of crime podcasts saved on my phone.

“The procedure can take anywhere between three and 10 hours,” a nurse had told us, shaking her head. I looked at the books at my feet and didn’t pick any up. I turned the fluorescent light on, and turned it off. I looked at the psychology diplomas behind his desk. He had finally gotten them framed, 10 years after his last graduation. I sat on the floor and leaned on his desk.

The author and their partner, Don. They are sitting in the passenger seat of a car while Don is driving.
The author and their partner, Don.

During his surgery, I considered reaching out to his ex

I thought of calling Bridget, Don’s ex. Don met Bridget a year into our relationship; they’d dated for three years. Bridget broke up with him the summer before. He was over her, but I still missed her. She and I texted here and there, but it seemed inappropriate to call now.

Before Bridget, I’d never felt the power of a metamour bond — the bond with my partner’s partner. Don had a few girlfriends who were around for a few months, but we never clicked. One had a high-pitched, nasal voice that scratched my insides, another answered all my questions with a single word. But Bridget was present in conversation, and, like me, initiated her journey into polyamory while single. “Monogamy was a coat that never fit quite right,” she’d told me. She was a kindred spirit. I felt seen.

The success rate of Don’s procedure was high, so my rational brain trusted everything would be fine, and that his arrhythmia would disappear. But I also imagined sitting in a waiting room alone 10, 20 years down the road, a doctor telling me they couldn’t save him. That anticipated grief cinched my insides.

I then imagined that Bridget was part of that hypothetical future. I pictured us holding each other while crying, reminiscing about Don’s quirks: his bedside table full of protein bar wrappers that he ate in the middle of the night, how he mindlessly wiggled his thumb above his phone when he was reading the news, the way he kissed us both on the back of the neck. Sharing the pain of losing a partner made the possibility of it seem bearable.

Through polyamory, I’ve made connections beyond my own partners

When I began my journey into non-monogamy, I was focused on the freedom of developing romantic and sexual intimacy with multiple people. But in my relationship with Bridget, I realized metamours could become core members of my family.

Don’s surgery went well, but I couldn’t shake the creeping worry that I had become too reliant on him. That my identity and well-being were primarily tied to him. While I’d had other committed partners since meeting him, those relationships had ended. But I didn’t expect that Bridget breaking up with Don could also break my heart.

Polyamory has shown me a way to expand my family and make it more resilient. My life experience has made me acutely aware and sensitive to the vulnerability of the nuclear family. My half-sister’s father drowned when she was 11. My uncle was a trucker and died in an accident when he was in his early 30s. Both my grandfathers died of heart attacks in their early 60s. My father had his stroke well before his retirement age. When I think of a resilient future, it necessitates having multiple life partners. I need to know my stool won’t get knocked over if one leg breaks.

Complete Article HERE!

3 Questions To Expect When Going ‘Open’ With Your Relationship

By Mark Travers

Consensual non-monogamy refers to a relationship structure in which all parties involved agree to engage in romantic, sexual or otherwise intimate relationships with multiple partners with the complete knowledge and consent of everyone involved. It encompasses various forms of non-monogamous arrangements, including but not limited to:

  • Polyamory. Having multiple, concurrent romantic and/or sexual relationships.
  • Open relationships. Sexual relationships with others outside of the primary partnership, while maintaining emotional commitment to each other.
  • Swinging. Romantically exclusive partners seek out shared sexual experiences with other individuals or couples. For instance, they may swap sexual partners with another couple.

Research shows that consensually non-monogamous relationships have similar levels of relationship quality and well-being as compared to monogamous relationships and it is natural to think about exploring them. However, there is still a significant amount of stigma and trepidation around entering such relationships. While bringing it up with a monogamous or long-term partner, you may encounter apprehension on their end or even have some questions about the process yourself.

Here are three common questions or fears that arise when considering consensual non-monogamy and how to navigate them.

1. Is Something Missing In Our Relationship?

Entering a non-monogamous relationship can bring up the question of whether there is something missing in the relationship, or even in oneself, and create uncertainty about a partner’s motivation for wanting to try a new arrangement.

However, it is possible to practice non-monogamy while still being in healthy and loving partnerships and the fundamental principle of this arrangement is that all parties involved are aware of the nature of the relationship, have given informed consent and willingly participate in it.

A 2022 survey revealed that two-thirds of Americans report fantasizing about having sex with other people and a third of partnered Americans would ideally like a certain degree of openness in their relationship as long as their primary relationship wouldn’t be compromised, highlighting that this desire is more common than we think.

Research shows that desiring consensual non-monogamy does not necessarily signal relationship problems and could instead be related to pursuing individual and relational well-being, exploring one’s sexuality or sexual fantasies, seeking personal growth, autonomy and novel experiences. Sex researcher Zhana Vrangalova of New York University explains that the human needs for security and companionship can co-exist with the need for novelty, exploration and experience-seeking, rather than competing with them.

Reflecting on your motivation to explore consensual non-monogamy and communicating it clearly to your partner, along with creating an agreement of boundaries, levels of disclosure about other partners, regular relationship check-ins and mutual relationship goals can create an arrangement that is comfortable and reaffirming for all parties.

2. What Will People Think Of Us?

The fear of being ostracized by others is not unfounded, as consensual non-monogamists might be perceived as promiscuous, making excuses for infidelity, less satisfied in their relationships or immoral.

Research shows that consensual non-monogamists often experience erasure of their identity and have to engage in disproportionate emotional labor to be understood in interpersonal relationships. A 2022 study further highlighted the expressions of disapproval, loss of resources, threatening behaviors, character devaluation and relationship devaluation they face.

Additionally, the external stigma and societal idealization of monogamy can become internalized and multi-partnered individuals consequently struggle with feeling that their desires are unnatural and experience psychological distress.

Researchers suggest that unlearning internalized bias, selectively disclosing relationship configurations in safe spaces and seeking support from peers and allies are all important coping tools to navigate this stigma.

3. Will This Change Our Relationship?

The anticipation of drama, jealousy and relationship conflicts deter people from considering consensual non-monogamy even if they are inclined to it. A 2022 study found that those who are more apprehensive about non-monogamy display more “zero-sum thinking” about relationships, referring to the notion that one person’s gain comes at another’s expense. These beliefs lead to viewing non-monogamy as diminishing resources within the primary relationship, such as time, financial support and sexual access to each other.

A 2020 study found that consensual non-monogamists could experience greater sexual satisfaction, especially with a defined and mutually agreed upon goal to address their sexual incompatibilities, without affecting individual life satisfaction or relationship quality with their primary partner.

Vrangalova suggests taking baby steps toward non-monogamy when you are starting out and talking about sexual fantasies rather than shying away from them. “Opening up” the relationship also does not have to physically involve another person.

“You can invite what I like to call the ‘shadow of the third’ into your relationship through shared fantasies, conversations, shared porn consumption, going to ‘play parties’ but maybe to watch and trying out apps that specialize in non-monogamous connections,” suggests Vrangalova.

It is essential to remember that your relationship dynamic is completely up to the two of you and you can set the ground rules together. An honest, open dialogue to address concerns, feelings and needs can help create the experience you both desire.

Complete Article HERE!

What Non-Monogamy Actually Is (And Isn’t)

— According To Non-Monogamous People

Non-monogamy is an umbrella term that encompasses various relationship styles that are not sexually and/or romantically exclusive between two people.

You might assume non-monogamy is synonymous with cheating. But that’s just not the case.

By

Non-monogamy has been practiced in some circles for a long time, but recently, there’s been more curiosity about the topic.

According to Google data, the term “ethical non-monogamy” has seen more than a 250% increase in search traffic over the past year. A 2020 YouGov poll of 1,300 U.S. adults found that a third of respondents say their ideal relationship is non-monogamous to a degree. And more than 20% of single Americans have engaged in consensual non-monogamy at some point in their lives, per a 2017 study published in the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy.

“It’s not just a new fad,” polyamory educator Leanne Yau told HuffPost. “People have been doing non-monogamy for a very long time. I think people are just talking about it more now.”

So what does it mean exactly? Non-monogamy is an umbrella term that encompasses various relationship styles that are not sexually and/or romantically exclusive between two people.

Sarah Stroh, a non-monogamous writer and creator behind the @monogamish_me Instagram account, described it to HuffPost as: “Any relationship structure that is consensually and openly non-monogamous, meaning either — or more likely both — partners in a couple have romantic and/or sexual contact with people other than each other.”

You may have come across the term “ethical non-monogamy,” sometimes referred to as “ENM.” The word “ethical” has been used to differentiate these kinds of relationships — where all parties have talked about and agreed to the arrangement — from ones where cheating is happening.

“It’s not just a new fad. People have been doing non-monogamy for a very long time. I think people are just talking about it more now.”
– Leanne Yau, polyamory educator

But some experts take issue with the term, said Zachary Zane, a sex columnist and sex expert for Archer, a new dating app for queer men. In his book “Boyslut: A Memoir and Manifesto,” he explains the pushback from researchers, educators and activists in the space about use of the word “ethical.”

“They don’t like the term ‘ethical’ because it implies that non-monogamy is inherently unethical. Why else would you feel compelled to preface with ‘ethical’?” he writes in the book.

“It also holds non-monogamy to an unfair, higher standard than monogamy. Monogamous people constantly lie and cheat on their partners, and they don’t have to preface their behaviors with [being] ethical or unethical, so why do non-monogamous folks? Then, of course, many ENM relationships are not ethical. You can absolutely still be a piece of shit even when practicing ENM.”

Instead, many people prefer terms like “consensual non-monogamy” (CNM) or just “non-monogamy.”

There are four main types of non-monogamous relationships.

Some of the common relationship structures that fall under the non-monogamous umbrella include monogamish, swinging, open relationships and polyamory.

“Things can be very fluid between them, but broadly, I see them falling into four types,” Yau said.

Monogamish is a term that was coined by sex and relationships writer and podcast host Dan Savage, and refers to a predominantly monogamous relationship in which “sexual activity outside the relationship is seen as the exception rather than the norm,” Yau said.

“So, that might look like having a threesome on special occasions, or occasionally going to a sex party. Or if there’s a kink that you want to explore, telling your partner and then finding someone to indulge that with,” she explained.

Swinging is when couples have sexual experiences with multiple partners, typically (but not always) as a unit. It often involves swapping partners or engaging in group sex, among other types of sexual play.

“Swinging is something that couples do together, as in they sleep with other people together, and they engage with other singles and/or couples. So that might look like threesomes, foursomes, orgies, sex parties, that kind of thing,” said Yau, noting that the term “swinger” has fallen out of favor to a degree. Some people, especially those in younger generations, may prefer to say they’re part of “the lifestyle” instead.

An open relationship is typically one that is sexually non-monogamous, but romantically monogamous. (Previously, however, people used the term as a catch-all to describe any non-monogamous relationship, Yau noted.)

“So when someone says that they are in an open relationship, I take that to mean that they are only romantically dating one person, but both of them can have casual sex with other people, either separately or together, on the side,” Yau said.

Polyamory is the only form of non-monogamy “where you not only have sexual non-exclusivity, but also romantic non-exclusivity,” Yau said. In other words, you’re part of multiple loving relationships at the same time. This stands in contrast to the other non-monogamous relationships described above in which everything outside of the primary relationship is “kept strictly sexual or casual, however you define that,” Yau explained.

While there still may be some hierarchy within certain polyamorous relationships, “it’s the one type where there isn’t necessarily a focus on a primary romantic relationship,” Yau said.

Many common assumptions about non-monogamy aren’t true.

Non-monogamy may be gaining traction but is still very much at odds with our monogamous cultural norms. Stigma and misunderstandings about these types of relationships persist. One common misconception: Non-monogamous relationships aren’t serious or lasting.

“My partner of over three years and I are non-monogamous and expecting a child in January,” Stroh said. “Non-monogamy is not just a phase or a structure for people who want something casual.”

Zane echoed a similar sentiment: “There’s this notion that ENM, specifically polyamory, isn’t sustainable long-term, meaning eventually, you and your partner(s) will break up,” he said. “Needless to say, that isn’t the case. There are poly folks who’ve been with their partners for decades.”

Some people mistakenly believe non-monogamy is cheating, which it’s not. In non-monogamous relationships, everyone should be aware, engaged and “enthusiastically participating,” Yau said. Honest communication, established guidelines and recurring check-ins are foundational here, just as they are in any healthy relationship.

“Non-monogamous relationships, just like monogamous relationships, require that everyone be aware and consenting,” Yau said. “It’s not the same as going behind someone else’s back and just kind of doing your own thing and having multiple partners without anyone knowing.”

“My partner of over three years and I are non-monogamous and expecting a child in January. Non-monogamy is not just a phase or a structure for people who want something casual.”
– Sarah Stroh, a non-monogamous writer

Another common misconception is that non-monogamy is just a last-ditch effort for couples trying to save their marriage.

“Of course, there are some folks who do attempt ENM as their relationship is failing, and the vast majority of the time, it does not save the relationship,” Zane said. “But that’s not the majority of folks who are ENM.”

In fact, if your relationship is in a bad place, introducing non-monogamy is probably only going to make matters worse, Yau said.

“Because non-monogamy requires quite a lot of security and confidence and trust in your partner in order to engage with it in a sustainable and healthy way,” she said. “A relationship that is on its way towards ending anyway is probably not going to be the best fit for that.”

Monogamous people may also assume that non-monogamous people are just inherently less jealous, which isn’t necessarily true.

“Non-monogamous folks are still human,” Zane said. “We still get jealous. We just — hopefully — address it better. Instead of lashing out at our partners, we admit that we’re feeling jealous and insecure, attempt to figure out the root of the jealousy and work together to find a solution.”

There also tends to be this assumption that at least one person in a non-monogamous relationship is being pushed into it against their will.

“Meaning, one partner would prefer to be monogamous but ‘can’t get their partner to commit to them,’” Stroh said. “Of course, these things are true sometimes for people who claim they are polyamorous, but it’s often not the case.”

This perception that one partner is being dragged into it and crying themselves to sleep every night is “really unfair,” Yau said.

“It portrays non-monogamous people as being selfish or toxic or abusive when we’re not interested in dating monogamous people, for the most part,” Yau said. “We want other people who fully accept and validate us and our desires.”

Complete Article HERE!

My Relationships Have No Clothes

— I have no moral objection to infidelity. For me, sex is just sex.

By Kate Bailey

He and I had been friends in graduate school in New Orleans for seven months when we had sex for the first time. He was engaged at the time to someone else who lived in a different state. It was Mardi Gras, and the attraction he and I had for each other, combined with multiple beers, had exploded into consensual and sloppy intercourse.

Our mutual attraction had been evident for a while. Before Thanksgiving, we had walked along Lake Pontchartrain near my apartment and delicately talked around the issue. I took a submissive position; someone else had gotten to him first and there was nothing I could do about that. I would not try to break up his relationship.

But I told him as straightforwardly as I could that I had no moral objection to infidelity. That was the only way I could think to phrase it. Sex was just sex. I was basically communicating that if he wanted to have sex with me, I was going to enthusiastically approve.

I quickly mentioned that what did matter to me was his ability to take care of two women’s feelings at the same time. He looked down at his boots and said that he probably wouldn’t be able to do that.

Wrong answer, I thought.

But our attraction was so intense that we ignored the potential problems. We were already ignoring the fact that he was leaving the next day to go meet his fiancée. I reiterated my point about taking care of two women’s feelings, hoping he would understand it better and retroactively concur. Instead, he took it as me concluding that we should keep our pants on, and he closed the discussion.

“We shouldn’t,” he said.

Using the word “shouldn’t” instead of “can’t” or “won’t” only made our copulation seem more inevitable.

A few days after our Mardi Gras sex, he said he didn’t regret it but that we couldn’t do it again. Over the following two years we had sex sporadically, and unethically, in that his fiancée didn’t know about it. Each time, he would inform me a few days after that we shouldn’t do it again.

Sign Up for Love Letter Your weekly dose of real stories that examine the highs, lows and woes of relationships. This newsletter will include the best of Modern Love, weddings and love in the news.

None of this made sense to me. We enjoyed doing it — why the constant back and forth? I never expected him to leave his fiancée, but I did expect a certain amount of corroboration about reality.

This scenario also had me constantly questioning myself. Why didn’t I have any objection to infidelity? Why did it feel so natural sharing a man with another woman? Why did monogamy feel like the wrong option?

He and his fiancée never got married. I moved away. But we stayed close. It’s been almost a decade since graduate school, and he and I have not lived in the same state since. He has a partner and a family. I have a budding career in television and a busy social life. The last time we had sex was five years ago. (Ethically, that time!)

A while back, I texted him to see if he wanted to chat on the phone. I love talking on the phone and ask for it often. It was Monday. He said he was visiting his ill father but could do Friday. I agreed, but come Friday, he forgot. The business of travel and baby-needs and parental role-reversal had pushed me to the back of his mind. A lapse in care happens in all types of relationships. Someone’s feelings get hurt because there was a plan and someone else forgot. It’s normal.

But in these moments, with us, the level of effort needed to fix it can become confusing for the monogamist. If this scenario had happened with a wife, maybe there would be a short fight, followed by Uber Eats and a “Below Deck” binge. If this scenario had happened with a girlfriend, then perhaps flowers would be best to soothe the hurt. If it was with a friend, maybe just a recommitment to plans and a promise not to forget again.

But when he and I have a conflict or a disagreement, we can sometimes get jammed up trying to resolve it. Because I don’t use labels, and because he doesn’t know how to label me, it becomes easy for him to regress to a familiar scenario: I’m the side piece and he’s the unavailable object of my desire.

This impulse normally only lasts a moment while we untangle what it is we’re stuck on. And I don’t hold it against him. It’s hard to have a relationship with someone like me who doesn’t dress up her partners as recognizable personas. The anarchy makes people uncomfortable.

To me, all relationships are like those paper dolls we had as children. The figures are in their underwear and then you put different clothes on them for different occasions. The base level is the figure laid bare. The base level is vulnerability and intimacy. It doesn’t matter how you dress it up — mistress, relative, friend, girlfriend, husband, lover — the base stays the same. And if the base is good, it’s easy to understand how someone can start off in one set of clothes and end up in another. Some time ago, I just stopped using the clothes to label my relationships.

On the day he forgot to call me, he immediately apologized. When I told him my feelings were hurt, he speculated that it’s probably because I’m not satisfied with what he’s giving me.

Which took me back to that day at Lake Pontchartrain, wondering again if he, or anyone, can take care of two people’s feelings simultaneously.

So, I really considered it.

Is it possible that, in this case, his assessment was right? Is satisfaction a security that I don’t allow myself by living my life this way?

For most people, monogamy means that to have an intimate relationship with a different person, you must end the current relationship before you can start another. One at a time, that’s the rule.

He has had three long-term partners since I have known him. If I had to wait until he had no other partner, we would have missed out on this relationship, which is 90 percent TV jokes and “Mad Men” quotes. We never would have the pride it brings each of us when we make the other laugh out loud. Or argue about a movie one of us hates and the other adores. Or the gossip we share about people we know in theater.

He has listened to me cry about my career, which I never do with anyone else. I have talked him through his body insecurities and am able to successfully assure him that he’s still attractive. We push each other in our creative ambitions. I send him details of celebrity encounters, and he keeps me full of baby pictures.

And we fight. I make biting comments that are sometimes too sharp. He doesn’t text enough. He’s avoidant. I’m prickly, and bratty. He’s envious. I say the wrong thing. I brag too much. He’s neurotic. Actually, we’re both neurotic.

In other words, a regular relationship.

After considering his comment, I arrived back to where I normally live. I am no more satisfied and no less satisfied than I would be if I followed a more traditional relationship model. Dressing the doll up might make things more comfortable at times, but it wouldn’t be true to our experience. And if the price we must pay is occasionally having to think hard about it to make sure it’s still working — well, I’m willing to pay that small price.

I haven’t believed in monogamy since the grad school experience with him. It sent me down a path that has informed my life ever since. It means that I never think about romantic relationships in an aspirational way. It means that I get to keep my relationships with men and women for a long time, after the sex has dwindled, or as the connection morphs in and out of romance. It means that I get more than “just being friends with an ex.” It means the intimacy that I have with others blooms in a natural way.

I enjoy having diverse relationships, because that is the reality for so many people, even when they have no words to explain them. Many of those who are unconventional don’t have anyone to look to for answers. As a relationship anarchist, I have a responsibility to reflect unconventional truths and challenge social norms. It’s difficult to question relationship models that have been in our society for centuries, but if we don’t start talking about it openly, it will never get easier.

I’m a non-monogamous woman in many different relationships. He and I are still partners in life. Just not the way that most people understand partners, or life.

Complete Article HERE!

1 in 3 Men Open to Having More Than One Partner. Women, Not So Much

By Dennis Thompson

  • Men are more open to having more people in their committed relationship than women, a new study has found
  • One-third of men in the United Kingdom are open to the idea of having more than one wife or longterm girlfriend
  • However, only 11% of women would want someone else in their relationship

Being in a marriage or long-term relationship typically includes promises of monogamy, but new research shows a surprising number of folks, mostly men, are open to the idea of having another person in the mix.

Fully one-third of men in the United Kingdom are open to the idea of having more than one wife or long-term girlfriend, while only 11% of women would want someone else in their relationship, results show.

Those trends hold when considering both types of polygamy, researchers said.

Those are polygyny, a man marrying more than one woman, or polyandry, where a woman marries more than one man, researchers found.

About 9% of men said they would share their partner, versus 5% of women interested in such a relationship, according to the report in the Archives of Sexual Behavior.

“This study shows that a sizable minority of people are open to such relationships, even in the U.K, where such marriages are prohibited,” said lead researcher Andrew Thomas, a senior lecturer in psychology at Swansea University in Wales.

“Interestingly, many more men are open to the idea than women — though there is still interest on both sides,” Thomas added.

For this study, researchers asked 393 heterosexual men and women in the U.K. how they felt about a committed partnership in which they shared their other half with someone else.

“Comparing polygyny and polyandry directly, men were three-and-a-half times more likely to say ‘yes’ to the former than the latter, while women were twice as likely to say ‘yes’ to having more than one partner, compared to the idea of sharing their partner with someone else,”

Thomas and his colleagues noted that some cultures around the world in both the past and present have practiced polygamy and polyandry.

For example, some societies in Africa and the Middle East have long-standing traditions of polygyny, while some communities in Tibet and Nepal practice polyandry, the researchers said.

“Committed non-monogamy has received a lot of attention recently,” Thomas noted in a university news release. “It’s a hot trend with more and more couples talking about opening up their relationships to include other people. However, these types of relationship are far from new.”

“While most seek monogamous relationships, a small proportion of humans have engaged in multi-partner relationships throughout human history, especially polygynous marriage where one husband is shared by several co-wives,” Thomas added.

Complete Article HERE!

H​ow to have a good threesome

— Safety, consent​, planning, and communication are key, sex experts​ say

By

  • In 2022, searches for threesomes on Pornhub rose by 34%, making it the 4th most searched term. 
  • If you’re curious but unsure where to start, these tips from sexologists and sex educators will help.
  • Safety and consent are paramount, as is preparation and the right configuration. 

Of the range of sexual fantasies, multi-partner sex tops the list. In 2022, searches on Pornhub for the term “threesomes” rose 34% to become the fourth most searched term.

But while threesomes may be close to top of mind worldwide for a little adult content watching, the logistics of threesomes in real life are far more complex. From concerns about safe sex to different partner configurations, there’s a lot that goes into a great three-way sexual encounter.

Business Insider spoke to sexologists and AASECT-certified sex educators and therapists to find out how to have a safe and pleasurable threesome.

What makes for a great threesome

Carol Queen, a sexologist at Good Vibes and curator of the Antique Vibrator Museum, said “three people who are comfortable with sexuality, can communicate well, are attracted enough to each other to be sexual together” are the best group for a threesome. All partners should “have compatible interests and boundaries to have a good time.”

How to find a third

If you’re in a monogamous relationship, finding who to add as a third party can be a big decision. Queen advises to “skip the friend option unless you have a friend who is an open and openhearted sex explorer — a friend like that might actually love to take you under their wing.” Queen added that inviting a friend over and propositioning them is a big no-no. Open and honest communication will be critical to ensure the health of the friendship long-term.

If you’re not sure where to find a third, Suzannah Weiss, resident sexologist for Fleshy, suggested joining apps like Feeld or Bloom, which are “geared toward the non-monogamous community, and you can mention that you are new to this and need some time to get to know people before jumping into bed.”

The right position will vary with each threesome

Although some positions may be more conducive to a threesome than others, not every position will work in every configuration, and it’s important to communicate with partners about what will work for you, according to sexologist Lisa Lawless.

“Some sex positions are more accessible if you’re a certain height or weight or are particularly strong or flexible,” Lawless said. The best position will depend on the type of sexual stimulation one wishes to receive or provide.

Lawless suggested the following positions:

Double cowgirl

In double cowgirl, one partner rides on the partner’s genitals while the other rides that person’s face. In this position, Lawless said, “The person on the bottom gets stimulation from both partners simultaneously. For many, watching their partners in this position can be visually arousing.”

However, for the person on the bottom, supporting both partners can get tiring, and it may make communication between partners difficult. Be sure to check in regularly.

69 plus 1

Friendly for configurations with two vaginas or two penises, in this position, two partners get into a 69 position. The third partner stands at the edge of the bed to penetrate one of the partners. Lawless said that the side-to-side configuration “can increase intimacy between the two partners on the bed,” but be mindful of neck strain.

Virtual threesome

Some partners may not be comfortable inviting a third person into the bedroom, so a virtual threesome allows a couple to have sex while a third person interacts through a screen in a different location. Lawless said that “app-controlled toys can enhance pleasure and interactivity among partners despite the distance.”

Safe sex and proper planning are critical

Michele M. March, a sex therapist at the Council for Relationships, emphasized the importance of safe sex to a successful threesome. “Some discussion of partners’ current sexual health status is important.” Winging it is ill-advised. “Who will bring the condoms? Will everyone agree to a pause for hygiene needs or for time to use effective protection? Some consideration of who uses what protection — against STI’s and pregnancy,” March said will help make everyone feel comfortable.

Weiss stressed the importance of swapping condoms frequently. “It’s safest to use a new condom each time you go from penetrating one partner to the other or from one orifice to another – and definitely if you are switching from anal to vaginal or oral,”

If you’re using lubricant, which every sexpert recommended, consider your options carefully. “Silicone lube is helpful because it lasts the longest, though you don’t want to use it with silicone toys,” Weiss said. Water-based lubricants work well with both toys and condoms, and oil-based lube should be avoided with condoms.

Complete Article HERE!

The Ethical Slut has been called ‘the bible’ of non-monogamy

– But its sexual utopia is oversimplified

By

In 2022, University of Melbourne evolutionary psychologist Dr Khandis Blake estimated that among young people, “around 4-5 per cent of people might be involved in a polyamorous relationship, and about 20 per cent have probably tried one”.

Polyamory statistics in Australia are limited. But recent research in the US shows just over 11% of people are currently in polyamorous relationships, while 20% have engaged in some form of non-monogamy. In the UK, just under 10% of people would be open to a non-monogamous relationship.

“To us, a slut is a person of any gender who celebrates sexuality according to the radical proposition that sex is nice and pleasure is good for you,” write the co-authors of The Ethical Slut, a now-classic guide to non-monogamy (tagged “the Poly Bible”).

Janet W. Hardy and Dossie Easton are the co-authors of The Ethical Slut.

When it was first published more than 25 years ago, shattered social norms and stigma around non-traditional relationship styles. Now in its third edition, revised to address cultural changes like gender diversity and new technological innovations (like dating apps), it’s sold over 200,000 copies since its first publication in 1997.

As a non-monogamous practitioner myself, I welcome literature that aims to destigmatise relationships that sit outside monogamy.

Sexual educator Janet W. Hardy and psychotherapist Dossie Easton, two self-described queer, polyamorous “ethical sluts” – friends, lovers and frequent collaborators – bring readers into their world of multiple partners and multiple kinds of sex. It encourages them to think about their own desires, and how they might be achieved in ethical ways.

Easton decided against monogamy after leaving a traumatic relationship, with a newborn daughter, in 1969. She taught her first class in “unlearning jealousy” in 1973. Hardy left a 13-year marriage in 1988, after realising she was no longer interested in monogamy. The pair met in 1992, through a San Francisco BDSM group.

Two years later, sick in bed, Hardy stumbled on the film Indecent Proposal, where a marriage crumbles after millionaire Robert Redford offers a madly-in-love (but struggling with money) married couple, played by Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore, a million dollars for one night with Demi.

“A million dollars and Robert Redford, and they have a problem with this? It made no sense to me,” Hardy told Rolling Stone. “I really got it at that point, how distant I had become from mainstream sexual ethics.” And so she reached out to Easton to propose they collaborate on a book on non-monogamy.

The Ethical Slut is a significant guide to navigating sexual freedom, open relationships and polyamory – responsibly and thoughtfully. It’s aimed at readers exploring non-monogamy, or supporting loved ones to do so.

What is The Ethical Slut?

The book is divided into four parts, each offering mental exercises to help readers embrace a sexually diverse lifestyle. It aims to support those interested in exploring non-monogamous relationships, free from stigma or shame.

The first part offers an overview of non-monogamy. An ethical slut approaches their relationships with communication and care for their partner(s), whether casual or committed, while staying true to their desires.

In the second part, the authors urge readers to break free from the “starvation economy” mindset, which conditions us to think love and intimacy are scarce resources. This is what leads to fear and possessiveness in dating, sex and relationships, they explain.

In part three, readers learn how to handle jealousy and insecurity, while managing conflicts effectively.

Finally, the authors cover various non-monogamous sexual practices. There are tips for navigating swinging and open relationships as a single person, group sex (orgies), and advice on asking for what you want in a sexual encounter.

‘Everything’s out on a big buffet’

The Ethical Slut’s appeal lies in its ability to help people shift their mindset about monogamy, in a society where other forms of relationships have often been deemed immoral. (Though this is changing.)

Co-author Hardy told the Guardian in 2018:

What I’m seeing among young people is that they don’t have the same need to self-define by what they like to do in bed, or in relationships, like my generation did. Everything’s out on a big buffet, and they try a little of everything.

Ezra Miller has talked about his ‘polycule’.

Five years later, in 2023, many celebrities openly identify as polyamorous. Ezra Miller has talked about his “polycule” (a network of people in non-monogamous relationships with one another), musician Yungblud has called himself polyamorous, and Shailene Woodley has been in and out of open relationships.

Books like Neil Strauss’s The Game (2005) view sex and relationships as ongoing competitions, requiring varied strategies to effectively land a partner. Instead, The Ethical Slut encourages developing genuine, consensual connections through communication and honesty. Relationships are seen as fluid and open to change, with endings viewed as opportunities for growth and development, not failures.

Rather than teach readers to mimic a social norm that will “win” them sex or relationships, The Ethical Slut pushes readers to think beyond what is “normal”.

Dating apps like Feeld, PolyFinda and OkCupid enable individuals to link profiles with their partners, promoting transparency and openness about their relationship status and desire for diverse sexual experiences.

And more books with varied and nuanced takes on non-monogamy have emerged since 1997, such as More than Two, Opening Up and Many Love.

A utopian mirage?

There’s much to appreciate in the messages The Ethical Slut conveys. However, it’s framed with a utopia in mind – one that doesn’t quite exist.

A key aspect of this book is challenging the starvation economy that influences monogamous relationships. In an ideal world, breaking free from this mindset about love and intimacy seems like paradise. The idea of loving more than one person is beautiful, connected and certainly achievable. But it’s also a significant challenge.

For many, longing for love and connection is not just a concept but a real, lived experience. Withholding affection in relationships can be emotionally abusive and manipulative. It’s essential to recognise non-monogamous people may still be susceptible to – or even perpetuate – these behaviours.

The authors present themselves as spiritually and morally enlightened in their non-monogamous choices and their sexual practices. Monogamy is framed as a negative byproduct of a regressive culture, rather than a genuine choice in its own right. Substance use is severely frowned on, echoing longstanding taboos around the use of drugs in sexual play.

The Ethical Slut frames monogamy as ‘a negative byproduct of a regressive culture’, rather than a choice.

The Ethical Slut makes universal assumptions about people’s experiences without considering broader social and personal influences. For instance, the section on flirting assumes a global understanding on what constitutes flirting cues between people. It lacks cultural, gendered and neurodiversity awareness.

Rejecting sex is not always easy

The authors assert “being asked [for sex], even by someone you don’t find attractive, is a compliment and deserves a thank-you”. Yet a simple “Thank you, I am not interested” is not always easy.

Research has shown women need to find ways to gently reject cisgender, heterosexual men to avoid violence (like “I have a boyfriend/husband”). And many men often do not take no as an answer. Thanking men for compliments can also lead to further hostility and aggression.

The authors advocate for women to say yes more, assuming women only say no due to shame and stigma. But the real fear of experiencing violence is a major deterrent. For example, recent research in the UK on recreational sex clubs has found that cisgender, heterosexual men may show sexual interest in trans women, only to immediately become violent with them.

These assumptions are echoed in discussions about barrier methods, sexual health testing, birth control and abortion options. The Ethical Slut assumes everyone has equitable access to sexual health education, and reproductive health services and products.

Yet the overturn of Roe vs Wade in the US has shown this is not the case. People who experience menstruation and pregnancy are increasingly losing – or never had – those reproductive freedoms.

Emotions are ‘choices’

The book envisions an idealised world where emotion and logic unite to challenge social constructs of monogamy, possessiveness and control. It’s underpinned by a belief our emotions (including jealousy) are choices we make about life events.

In The Ethical Slut, jealousy is solely attributed to the person experiencing it, overlooking its complexity in various contexts. Jealousy can be a sign of insecurity, grief or relationship issues, among other things.

Managing jealousy is presented as something an individual needs to address on their own. The book lacks guidance for dealing with partners who might contribute to jealousy by not fulfilling emotional needs, breaking boundaries, failing to communicating effectively, or purposely trying to evoke the feeling.

The person experiencing jealousy is held solely responsible for their emotion, ignoring the role of the non-jealous partner. Suggested responses, like “I’m sorry you feel that way, I have to go on my date now”, reaffirm this mindset.

Jealous partners are advised to write journal entries, practice mindfulness or go on a walk to deal with their emotion. In a book about sex that is fundamentally about relations with others, jealousy becomes lost in the hyperfocus on the individual.

The person experiencing jealousy is held solely responsible for their emotion.
< The book’s explanation that emotions like jealousy are normal and natural, may emerge unexpectedly and should not be shamed, contradicts the idea that emotions are choices. People don’t necessarily choose to feel grief, anxiety, insecurity or sadness. Intellectualising emotions as conscious choices does more harm than good.

The book also praises compersion, the act of feeling joy at your partner’s happiness – even with other partners – as a positive experience, possible when a partner feels secure. “A lot of us experience jealousy that we don’t want, so compersion can offer a pathway to a better place,” says Easton. Yet the book provides little guidance in how this can be achieved.

Compersion can also be weaponised against those who experience insecurities, with statements like “if you were really poly/non-monogamous, you’d feel compersion for me”. Some have suggested compersion should be seen as a bonus, not a requirement, in non-monogamy.

‘A too-perfect picture’

Non-monogamists may face challenging conversations about emotional needs. The book’s advice assumes a certain level of emotional intelligence, experience and good intentions. It lacks guidance on dealing with emotionally unintelligent partners, malicious intentions, potential abuse, or what to do when conversations go terribly awry.

While I applaud the book’s push towards destigmatising non-monogamy, it paints a too-perfect picture. The odd sense of censorship is even there in its depictions of potential challenges, which seem cherry-picked to demonstrate a sense of ease with the lifestyle.

Stories about managing jealousy come to neat and tidy endings. One example is Janet’s story about falling in love with another partner and having the discussion about it with her “primary” partner. Her primary handles the discussion well and they go on to have a fulfilling relationship. There are few genuinely negative examples.

As a result, The Ethical Slut feels like it’s working to hide any potential downfalls to embracing a non-monogamous lifestyle. But providing examples of where things do not work and how people manage that could be quite useful.

Nevertheless, the book is an important introduction to non-monogamy. Perhaps it’s best used as a stepping stone for deeper exploration.

Complete Article HERE!

I Help Couples Improve Their Sex Life.

— Here Are The 4 Things I Wish More Men Knew.

“Because I’ve made these mistakes myself, I know I want to be loving, kind and generous. Most of my clients do, too.”

By

Imagine a new couple in their early 20s. Their relationship is fraying at the edges. She complains that if she doesn’t have sex with him, he mopes for days. If she does have sex with him, he’s happy for a few days before he begins complaining again.

He reports feeling lonely, that she’s not prioritising their relationship, and that he’s tried everything to spark her desire, but nothing works. He has two affairs in a year. She’s devastated and betrayed.

If my wife and I had been wise (and wealthy) enough to go to couples therapy at the lowest point in our marriage, this is how a therapist might have described us.

Shortly after my second affair, shocked and ashamed by my behavior, I began to read books about relationships, got into a men’s support group, started going to therapy, and expanded my friend circle so that my sexual relationship didn’t have to meet all my needs for human connection. Today, I provide therapy for couples in the area of relationships, sex and consent. In particular, I help men improve their relationships.

Because I’ve made these mistakes myself, I know I want to be loving, kind and generous. Most of my clients do, too. Here are four things I wish more men knew about consent.

Pressure kills desire

I used to express feelings of rejection, resentment and hopelessness because my wife and I “had not had sex in so long.” My wife would then go to the calendar and identify the numerous times we’d had sex recently. I could see she was right, but I also couldn’t change my feelings, because I was dependent on her to change my mood. This inability to soothe my emotions created sexual pressure for her.

This is a dynamic I see in my office regularly. When you can’t regulate your emotional responses when a partner declines your offers for sex, the emotional consequences of turning you down creates pressure for your partner. This negative pattern then taints any invitation, offer or initiation of sex inside a relationship. When your partner feels pressured, there’s no room for them to have their own desire, because your desire is taking up all the attention.

The absence of no is not the same as the presence of yes

One of the most common questions I get about this is whether ensuring you receive explicit consent will interrupt the flow of a sexual experience. But that should be the least of our worries. Do you know what interrupts the flow? Feelings of hurt and violation.

While learning consent communication, it may be awkward. But as you get more proficient in consent skills, it will interrupt the flow less, it will get sexier, and you will eventually find that it is a part of the flow with this partner. There will be a smaller learning curve with the next partner, as there is with everything in a new relationship.

The author with a copy of his book.
The author with a copy of his book.

Don’t get defensive

Men, even if you think you’re a “good guy” who would “never do anything like that,” you need to understand that men’s violence against women is pervasive. There’s a reason that women are afraid of men. They have more than likely been a victim of a man’s violence or threats, or are close to a woman who has been a victim of a man’s violence.

If your partner is trying to navigate around past trauma, you can collaborate by asking a new partner, “Is there anything you need me to do, or not to do, to help you feel safe throughout this process?”

If you do trigger their trauma, even inadvertently, don’t get defensive.

I once decided to go for a walk in a recent ex-partner’s neighbourhood. Coincidentally, my recent ex sent me a text asking me where I was and I replied that I was down the street. Women readers have probably gasped.

When this triggered fears exacerbated by her experience with a past stalker, I acknowledged that I had made a mistake, apologised, left, and didn’t repeat the error. She later thanked me for changing my behaviour and helping her feel safer. If I had gotten defensive, I’d have only worsened the situation.

Consent is for you

Men aren’t used to the idea that consent is for us. This is an essential lesson for us to learn.

Eighteen years into our marriage, my wife and I agreed, after almost two years of talking and preparing, to open our marriage to non-monogamy. As I became more confident dating as a polyamorous man, I learned I also needed to use consent to protect myself and my heart.

I had a friend who expressed interest in me, but in her polyamorous relationships, there were some broken agreements and conflicts between partners. Most of those issues weren’t her fault, but they did affect her. This didn’t create a feeling of safety for me, so I said “no thank you” to her offers. But after engaging in many consent conversations, I eventually felt comfortable enough to negotiate a very memorable sexual relationship. I had protected myself with “no,” until “yes” felt right. If it stopped feeling right in the future, I knew I could return to “no.”

Consent isn’t about trying to get consent from our partner. Consent is for people of all genders and all levels of desire. Consent makes us feel better about ourselves and our relationships. I hope to teach more men to prevent harm and increase their capacity to maintain healthy relationships.

Complete Article HERE!

What Is a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Relationship in Non-Monogamy?

— And can it actually work?

By Gigi Engle

One of the most interesting things about consensual non-monogamy (CNM) is its fluidity. These relationship structures are co-created by partners in order to establish a situation that works for them and their needs, which means that each CNM partnership functions in its own unique ways.

While CNM’s key tenants tend to emphasize openness, communication, and honesty, what this looks like for any given consensually non-monogamous partnership will vary. And for some couples in open relationships, that means not wanting to know anything about what their partners do (sexually/romantically) with other people. Like, at all.

Enter: Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Not to be confused with the hugely controversial US military policy that discriminated against the LGBTQ community until its 2011 repeal, a Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) policy in consensual non-monogamy refers to the way partners communicate—or, rather, don’t communicate—about sexual or romantic experiences outside of their relationship.

DADT “is different from other non-monogamous agreements in that it prioritizes a lack of transparency between partners, which goes against the openness and honesty that is typically encouraged in non-monogamy,” says polyamory educator and sex positive advocate Leanne Yau, founder of Poly Philia. This means that partners agree to have sex with and/or date people outside of their relationship, but they don’t disclose those experiences to each other.

The question is: Can these arrangements work for people? And if so, how?

Let’s take a deep dive into what a DADT relationship really is, how it works, and any potential issues that can come up as a result of having an agreement like this—because, spoiler alert, such issues are, uh, not not a possibility.

What is DADT and how does it work?

As we’ve established, DADT means you’re allowed to have sex with people outside of your relationship, but you don’t talk about it with your primary partner. “[It is] a principle used by CNM people so that they can experience freedom from the typical monogamous expectation of sexual exclusivity, but without needing to make clear agreements or practices of transparency,” explains Joli Hamilton, PhD, CSE, a qualitative researcher who focuses on non-monogamy.

Cosmo’s ‘Navigating Non-Monogamy’ columnist Zachary Zane, author of Boyslut: A Memoir and Manifesto and sex expert for Fun Factory, says it’s important to understand that this is *not* the same as cheating. While DADT does mean not telling your partners about the sex you have with other people, everyone is consenting to the arrangement. “Before you and your partner ever sleep with someone else, you have a sit-down conversation where you make it clear that it is acceptable to sleep with other people under certain circumstances,” Zane says. “And when you do sleep with other people, you do not tell your partner.”

For a DADT arrangement to work, all people involved need to be on board. This means that not only do the primary partners agree to it, but their outside partners also need to be aware of and consent to the DADT agreement. Informed consent is the only way to have ethical non-monogamous dynamics.

Can Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policies really function in a healthy way?

Basically, these agreements can work for some people…if they’re willing to communicate. This may seem paradoxical given that the whole idea of DADT is that you don’t share details with your partner. But in order for a DADT policy to actually work, clear negotiation is crucial. Hamilton says that without communication, the seemingly simple rule of “just don’t tell me anything” can get confusing pretty quickly.

The level at which non-disclosure functions will depend on your relationship boundaries. “A person might ask their partner that they don’t even tell them the basics, such as when they’re going on a date with another person—after all, ignorance can be bliss,” says Yau. “At the extreme end of DADT, a person might just want to pretend that they and their partner are monoamorous, and that there are no other people involved.”

Zane says that these arrangements tend to work best when sex outside the relationship is done sparingly, if one or both partners travels frequently, or if partners are long-distance. “Often, DADTs have a rule that you can only have sex when out of the state,” he explains. “This works well when one partner travels a lot for work. Additionally, the other partner won’t ever ‘run into’ the person their spouse slept with out of state, which can cause drama.”

What are the downsides of DADT arrangements?

Hate to break it to you, but these policies can certainly become problematic. This is especially true if the agreement requires lying about where you were or who you were with in order to avoid disclosing details of outside relationships.

“I think if you find yourself in a situation where you have to lie to your partner about what (and who) you did consistently, this will lead to problems,” Zane says. “Additionally, a partner can start to second guess their spouse’s whereabouts, which can make you become obsessive, resentful, and anxious.”

Basically, it comes down to how your agreement functions in your particular partnership. Surprise: DADT tends to cause issues if you’re using it to avoid the work of dealing with your feelings. “Non-monogamy requires significant emotional work, and avoiding that doesn’t solve the issue,” Yau says.

Hamilton agrees, saying that the lack of communication that is usually present with a DADT can leave couples feeling like they’re walking on eggshells, always unclear of the rules or if they might be breaking them. This can lead to some pretty precarious situations that can be very hard to overcome.

It’s all about intentions, right? If you have a DADT because you simply aren’t interested in knowing about your partner’s other sexual and/or romantic relationships, that’s one thing, but if you have a DADT to avoid difficult feelings, that could be a potential pitfall.

“There is a distinction between partners who don’t want to have that much information about each other’s partners because they simply aren’t interested to know, and partners who are doing it because they want to pretend that it isn’t happening and want to bury their heads in the sand,” Yau says.

If you and your partner want a DADT agreement, here are 3 ways to make it work

Have a crystal clear agreement

Relationship therapist Rea Pearson, a sex-positive BACP-accredited counselor and clinical sexologist, says that couples should literally sit down and write their agreement out. This gives everyone a chance to think through the details and set boundaries. “The agreement would include all the major rules and boundaries that are important to them, but can be reviewed and amended as time goes on. It might include areas such as whether sex is protected or not, and how often partners test for STIs,” she says. It may also include how often partners can see other people, how much time is allotted for other partners, and certain spaces that are off-limits, such as the shared home.

Consider *why* you want this

It’s important to spend some time honestly thinking about your intentions for wanting an agreement like this. Be willing to self-reflect. Hamilton says that she doesn’t encourage clients to enter into DADT agreements because it impacts their ability to grow together.

“If what you want is to be able to pretend that your partner isn’t who they are, I’d encourage you to consider what that will feel like in a year or five,” she says. “If you’re in a short-term situation, then consider if this is how you want to practice relating, because if you get used to making clear, explicit agreements with partners it becomes easier and easier,” she says. “If you practice DADT, you don’t give yourself that opportunity.” Essentially, a DADT can work in a short-term framework, but it rarely has legs to stand the test of time.

Be willing to renegotiate

Lastly, it’s important to understand that just because you have a DADT policy in your relationship doesn’t mean it will always work for you (and, in fact, they rarely do). CNM dynamics deserve to be interrogated. Couples should come back to the table regularly to revisit agreements that are in place and determine if they’re still working for everyone involved. Pearson suggests having a weekly check in. “By checking in regularly, [partners] are far more likely to recognize a problem early on and be able to tackle it before it escalates,” she says.

Being open and willing to change or alter dynamics allows consensually non-monogamous relationships to continue to exist in harmony. While a DADT agreement can work, endeavoring to move to a place of more openness and honesty is likely the best course of action if you want your relationship to, well, stay a relationship.

Complete Article HERE!

What is ‘veto power’ in non-monogamous relationships

— And why is it so problematic?

Having the power to ‘veto’ your partner’s other partners can have some seriously messy outcomes.

By Gigi Engle

If you opened up your relationship, would you want the ability to tell your partner’s other partners to piss off if you weren’t down with them? Intrigued? Let’s talk about “veto power.”

Veto power within consensually non-monogamous relationships is a hotly debated topic. People within the CNM community have very strong feelings about it. But, what does it mean to have veto power? “In CNM relationships, ‘veto’ indicates an agreement between primary partners in which they can say no to new or other partners,” says Dr. Celina Criss, a certified sex coach specializing in gender, sexuality, and relationship diversity.

Yes, you read that correctly. It’s the ability to tell your partner that they essentially have to break up with their other partner(s) if you don’t like them or the relationship. If that sounds problematic, that’s because it often is.

Whether you love it or hate it, the concept of veto power is one worth exploring and unpacking. As with all things dating-related, it’s complicated and in need of nuanced conversations.

If you’re active in the online dating realm, you’ve probably been hearing more about CNM — aka ethical non-monogamy or ENM — lately. The term “ethical non-monogamy” has seen a 213 percent spike in searches in the last year alone.

Here is everything you should know about veto power within CNM dynamics.

What is ‘veto power’ in the CNM world?

Veto power is essentially the ability to tell your partner’s other partner(s) to take a hike, if you decide the relationship isn’t working for you anymore. It grants partners the ability to determine who their partner can and cannot have relationships with. It exists within hierarchical CNM dynamics, wherein there are two (or more) primary partners and all other partners are considered ‘secondary.’

Joli Hamilton, a qualitative researcher and relationship coach specializing in non-monogamy, tells us veto power is an explicit or implicit agreement that one partner within a primary relationship can require a change to the structure, intensity, or existence of their partner’s other relationships. This can be true of new partners and existing partners. “Sometimes veto power is explicitly granted as a way to reinforce the idea that an existing couple will remain the priority over any new relationships that may come into existence,” she explains.

Veto power is essentially the ability to tell your partner’s other partner(s) to take a hike, if you decide the relationship isn’t working for you anymore. In order to use veto power in an ethical way (though some would argue it is never ethical), the agreement must be explicit. All partners within the relationship need to understand that the veto power is in place, how it functions for the primary partners, and consent to honoring it. As you may have guessed, this can get quite complicated.

Why would a couple choose to have ‘veto power’ within their relationship structure?

There are a lot of reasons why a couple might choose to enact veto power. Hamilton says that it’s often used as a tool to help couples feel safer when they’re first opening up. Basically, it makes you feel like no matter who else you or your partner might date, you’ll always be the “chosen one.”

“Lots of people want veto power when they are transitioning from a monogamous paradigm to a more expansive relationship structure, in part because they can’t imagine a world where they wouldn’t have a say over what their partner does with their emotions or body,” she explains. This need to be held above all others is born out of ‘compulsory monogamy,’ the socially constructed notion that being monogamous and prioritizing one partner is the “correct” way of existing within a relationship.

And yes, this has problematic implications when you’re practicing CNM because it tries to hold a different way of relating to the monogamous standard. Hamilton says she’s seen plenty of couples use veto power as a means to retain a sense of control, with decidedly mixed results.

The positives of ‘veto power’

Criss tells us that there can be upsides in using veto power within CNM dynamics. If your relationship is consensually hierarchical, the veto can act as a safeguard for the primary partnership. Depending on the outlined agreement between partners, “this objection can be at the beginning of an additional relationship or later, if that relationship has become problematic,” she says. “One way to think of it is as a safe word for CNM: it indicates there is a problem or concern that needs to be addressed.”

When used in this way, the veto acts as less of a tool of control and more as a way to explore issues that come up with primary partners and their other partners. “It can be quite useful,” Criss adds.

Again, for this dynamic to work – the veto, and what it means within your dynamic, needs to be clearly outlined and agreed to by all parties involved in the relationship. When a person within the primary partnership takes on a secondary or tertiary partner, that partner needs to be fully aware of the existing veto power and consent to it. Otherwise, we’re just getting plain old unethical.

Hierarchical polyamorous and open structures are a highly contentious subject within the CNM community – with some people strongly endorsing hierarchy and others believing it is entirely unethical. Those who oppose it point to “monogamy culture,” wherein the idea of the “primary partnership” is of utmost importance – which goes against the very nature of CNM. There isn’t a total consensus.

The drawbacks of ‘veto power’

Veto power offers primary partners a sense of control within relationships, but Moushumi Ghose, a licensed sex therapist, says that the “control” is usually a band-aid for larger issues. Often, the veto is used as a way to avoid dealing with the myriad uncomfortable feelings that come with opening up a relationship. “Veto power is extremely problematic because it creates a power imbalance, essentially. The biggest threat is that one person can close an open relationship simply because of uncomfortable feelings,” she says. It tries to remove the need to face and work through difficult emotions and dynamics that inevitably come up when you’re involved with multiple partners. This doesn’t solve anything, and instead can build resentment.

Veto power can also be problematic when it is used as a means to control your partner’s behavior. Criss tells us that “using a veto to non-consensually control or threaten your partner is not OK, in fact it runs counter to the general idea of CNM.” CNM specifically emphasizes consent and individual autonomy so, when veto power is used as a way to infringe upon a partner’s autonomy, that’s when it becomes an issue.

“Veto power is extremely problematic because it creates a power imbalance.” Hamilton agrees, telling us that veto power can lead to hypervigilance within a relationship, often resulting in monitoring your partner’s behavior such as checking their phones or social media and trying to control who they are with and when. “All of these can increase the amount of jealousy we feel, and none of those behaviors lead to more trust in your partner,” she says. “Instead it keeps you locked in a cycle of watchful waiting for your partner to screw up or overstep your comfort.”

What’s more, even if both primary partners agree that veto power is on the table, it often neglects to consider the feelings, wishes, and boundaries of the (very real) human people who aren’t in the primary partnership. “Veto power removes consent, especially when you consider that in CNM there are multiple people involved,” Ghose says. This can turn into a very messy situation, very quickly.

What to do if your partner asks for ‘veto-power’

Navigating these conversations requires empathy and nuance. “If your partner wants a veto and you’re not into it, this is an opportunity to get curious and investigate,” Criss says.

She suggests exploring the following questions: Why are they asking for this? Are you in alignment with your relationship goals, your CNM dynamic, and how you are feeling about each other?

Hamilton tells us that the need for veto can begin to dissipate once you learn to deal with difficult emotions in a healthy way. “Learn to regulate your nervous system and practice holding your body’s sensations and emotions during times of stress,” she says. This can look like adopting grounding and breathing techniques.

You may want to trade in veto power for authentic ways your partner can make you feel secure – and visa versa. “Have conversations about what security looks like and sounds like for you. Ask for those things to be prioritized,” Hamilton says. “Don’t make your partner guess – actually tell them what it looks and sounds like for you to receive their loving attention. Help them co-create a sense of security with you.”

Sometimes these conversations can be scary or confronting. If you find this is the case, you can always employ the help of a qualified, CNM-friendly sex therapist or coach to help you.

Whatever your journey is, we salute you.

Complete Article HERE!

How Do ‘Throuples’ Make It Work?

How do you overcome the emotional and practical hurdles that can complicate a three-person romantic relationship

By Mark Travers

Falling in love with two people at once is a genuine and profound experience for many. It’s not merely about divided affection; it’s about an expansive capability to care, connect and commit to more than one person. The decision to form a throuple can arise from various motivations, ranging from a shared bond or common goals to mutual attraction or simply the evolution of a friendship into something more.

Despite society becoming increasingly open-minded, non-traditional relationships like throuples (romantic relationships between three people) still face a set of unique challenges. It’s crucial to recognize that these relationships demand just as much dedication and work, if not more. Setting ground rules becomes paramount. Without clear guidelines and continuous dialogue, misunderstandings can spiral into larger conflicts.

Here are two conversations that can help throuples smooth out the kinks in what can be a potentially unstable dynamic.

1. The “Are We Ready To Do This” Conversation

When considering a throuple relationship, it’s essential to discuss and understand each partner’s background, experiences and motivations. Recognizing and embracing diversity early on can set the stage for open communication and mutual respect.

A 2019 study published in The Journal of Sex Research contrasted polyamorous relationships with monogamous ones in terms of demographics and life choices. It found that polyamorous individuals, including those who favor being in a throuple, often identified with minority sexual orientations. Moreover, they demonstrated tendencies towards civil unions and had experienced higher rates of divorce. Additionally, their annual incomes often fell below $40,000 compared to those in monogamous relationships.

These findings are more than just numbers—they hint at experiences, challenges and perspectives that individuals in throuples might bring into the relationship. While the age range was similar between both groups, life experiences and choices diverged significantly. Such insights can serve as valuable talking points for potential throuples. By acknowledging and discussing these differences from the outset, throuples can lay a solid foundation for their relationship, tolerant of diversity and emotional and experiential complexity.

Here are some ideas to ponder before considering taking the three-person relationship plunge:

  • Self-awareness. How well do you know your own boundaries, needs and triggers? Are you open to understanding and adapting to the needs and boundaries of two other individuals?
  • Past relationship dynamics. Given the higher rates of divorce and civil unions among polyamorous individuals, it’s worth discussing past relationships. What did you learn from them, and how can those lessons inform the dynamics of the throuple?
  • Financial compatibility. How do you envision sharing financial responsibilities? Will the financial contribution be even, or based on individual contribution?
  • Cultural and societal concerns. Given the non-traditional nature of throuples, are you prepared to face potential societal biases or prejudices? How will you handle questions or critiques from family, friends and strangers?
  • Having these conversations up front can provide clarity and help in setting the relationship on a firm foundation. Each question is designed to unravel complexities, address potential challenges and ensure that every individual in the throuple feels seen, heard and valued.

    2. The Regular “Check-In”

    Given that there are three individuals involved, each with their unique emotions, needs and expectations, ensuring a balance where everyone feels valued can be a delicate act. All three individuals will evolve as the relationship progresses, and their needs might shift. Regular check-ins provide a platform to address feelings or concerns that might arise, ensuring they don’t fester or escalate into bigger issues. Topics for regular check-ins might include:

    • Emotional well-being. Are the emotional needs or concerns of each partner addressed?
    • Time management. How are all three partners ensuring that they get quality time both individually and collectively? Are any adjustments needed?
    • Boundaries. Are the established boundaries still working? Do they need revisiting or adjusting based on the relationship’s progression?
    • Future planning. Throuples need to consider their future—living arrangements, financial plans or even family planning if that’s on the table.

    These conversations can help throuples identify issues that may not be obvious in everyday life. For instance, a 2021 study published in Frontiers in Psychology found that 21% to 33% of individuals who had previously engaged in polyamory grappled with personal possessiveness and challenges in managing the associated emotions.

    While prior research suggests that jealousy is a more common problem in monogamous relationships, not polyamorous ones, the unique structure of a throuple might naturally present more varied situations that can trigger jealousy compared to a monogamous relationship. However, it’s essential to understand that jealousy isn’t exclusive to one type of relationship. The key, for such relationships, lies in recognizing potential jealousy triggers, maintaining open communication and setting clear boundaries, which can be made possible by frequent check-ins.

    Conclusion

    When it comes to making a throuple work, the foundation lies in trust, understanding and respect. While open conversations about your expectations and goals are important in any relationship, conversations about the whats, whys and hows become especially important in non-traditional arrangements. Although every throuple is unique, each will evolve over time. Recognizing that change is constant and being willing to navigate it together is crucial.

    Complete Article HERE!