A Practical Guide to Modern Polyamory

— How to open things up, for the curious couple.

By Allison P. Davis, Alistair Kitchen, Alyssa Shelasky, Anya Kamenetz, and Bindu Bansinath

If you live in New York, it’s very possible you’ve recently found yourself chatting with a co-worker, or listening to the table next to you at a restaurant, and heard some variation of “They just opened up, and they’re so much happier.” Or “My partner’s partner truly sucks.” Ethical non-monogamy isn’t new (The Ethical Slut, the polyamorous bible, came out in 1997), and it isn’t exactly mainstream, but it isn’t so fringe either (or reserved for those who live in the Bay Area). A curious person might be tempted to download Feeld or let their partner know over salmon they’re ready to let in a third. But though people don’t talk about it in hushed tones anymore — Riverdale just ended with Archie, Betty, Jughead, and Veronica in a quad, after all — it isn’t such a simple thing to do well. There are a million things that can go awry, from the small and awkward (oversharing about a date) to the enormous and life-imploding (ending an otherwise fine relationship). The poly-curious among you likely have questions about the day-to-day operations — how do you tell your kids about it? Where do you find people to date? What if your partner gets way more matches than you do? What if their new partner is way hotter than you? To that end, we’ve created an exceedingly in-depth guide. We talked to nearly 40 people — some who’ve had open relationships for decades, others who only recently opened things up — to figure out how to capably, or at least less messily, date non-monogamously.

Is There Only One Way to Do It?

There are many, and choosing which one suits you depends on a lot of factors: Are you currently in a relationship? If you are, do you want other relationships to take equal priority? Do you want to fall in love with other people or just have sex with them? A non-exhaustive taxonomy.

Open Relationship: In a strictly technical sense, this is when you and your partner can have sexual, but not romantic, relationships with other people.

Swinging: A couple who have sex or dates with other people as a duo.

Hierarchical polyamory: When you and your partner can have relationships — romantic or sexual — with other people but have agreed to remain each other’s primary partner. You might pursue these relationships as a couple or separately.

Nonhierarchical polyamory: There are no primary partners in this scenario — everyone is on an equal footing.

Solo-poly: A single person pursuing multiple intimate or sexual relationships while trying to avoid riding the Relationship Escalator. This means you’re not particularly interested in, say, sharing a home or bank account with any one person.

Wait, What Is a ‘Metamour’?

Becoming non-monogamous doesn’t mean you have to join a ten-person polycule or memorize ‘The Ethical Slut.’ Still, there are terms that many non-monogamous people will use while discussing their arrangements, and it’ll make things easier to familiarize yourself with at least a few.

Comet partner: A romantic or sexual partner who might live far away or appears in your life only occasionally. When around, you pick up your tryst, but there are no obligations to one another between these meeting points.

Compersion: The pleasure you derive from your partner enjoying romantic or sexual happiness or success with a person who isn’t you. The opposite of jealousy.

Kitchen-table polyamory: A style in which everybody in a polyamorous network — primary partners, tertiary partners, metamours — is encouraged to form close and friendly relationships with one another (without necessarily being romantically involved) to the point where they can all sit down and have dinner without its being weird.

Metamour: Your partner’s other partners whom you are not also dating.

Monogamish: Often attributed to relationship columnist Dan Savage, this arrangement is at the halfway point of monogamous and open: You and your partner are exclusively committed to each other but allowed purely physical encounters on the side. Think of Cameron and Daphne from White Lotus, season two.

New-relationship energy (NRE): The all-consuming, chemistry-altering high that accompanies the early period of being romantically involved with a new person. NRE, and the chance to experience it many times, is cited as one of the biggest perks of polyamory, but it’s also one of the biggest sources of anxiety when a partner is experiencing it with someone else.

Nesting partners: The partner(s) with whom you live. Not necessarily a primary partner.

One-penis policy (OPP): Probably the most-hated concept in the world of ethical non-monogamy; this is often when a cis straight man only allows his female partner to sleep with another person who doesn’t have a penis.

Polysaturated: When you’ve reached maximum capacity on partners and/or time.

Primary partners: For people who practice hierarchical non-monogamy, this is the relationship that comes above all others in terms of time, commitment, loyalty — sometimes the person you share a home, finances, or children with. If you have a primary partner, you might refer to your other partners as secondary or tertiary.

Relationship escalator: This refers to the way in which monogamous people, by default, “level up” their romantic relationships: how they go from dating to becoming exclusive to living together to getting married to merging finances to having children. A process that many non-monogamous people want to avoid or at least question.

Vee structure: A three-person arrangement in which one person acts as the “hinge,” or point of connection, while the other two don’t have a romantic or physical relationship with one another.

Veto Power: If you’re in a primary partnership, you may grant each other the ability to call for a change in each other’s outside relationships — whether they’re spending too much time with a person or you simply object to them dating that person as a whole. A controversial concept within the poly world.

How Do I Broach This With My Partner?

There are so many ways this conversation could go wrong. So we asked three couples who handled it well — and one who might have handled it better — to tell us how they first proposed it.

Julia told Matt she had a crush.

Julia: After we had our child, I went through a few years of lacking sexual interest. It got to the point where it felt like I might never be interested in having sex again and that would be fine. That began to change in May 2022. I started having a crush on someone. I didn’t know if I was even going to tell Matt, but I didn’t want to repress this part of myself. And I didn’t want to cheat on him. Eventually, I told him about this crush, how I was feeling different and vibrant. I said, “I’m feeling more open about my sexuality and more interested in exploring it.” He said, “Are you asking to open the marriage?”

Matt: We talked and cried for hours. But I knew it made no sense to hold her back. I was like, I’m not going to get in your fucking way.

Julia: It was still an unresolved idea, and we sat with it for a week. I never wanted to push it, I wanted to wait for him to be the one to suggest it. Eventually, he said, “I don’t want to hold you back from being yourself.”

Misty reminded Ari of an old conversation.

Ages: 29 and 29
Open for: 3 years

Misty: The conversation happened after Ari came out as nonbinary. I brought up these conversations we had had in college about having threesomes. I used to say, “I would only do it if it was two guys. I’m not gay.” He’d say: “I’d do it if it were two girls. I’m not gay.” So at the time we thought, Okay, well, then we’re never going to do this.

Ari: You had just come out as pansexual. You said, “Maybe we can talk about what it would look like for me to start exploring that part of my sexuality.” I was shocked at my own response because in the past I’ve been very territorial and heavily monogamous. But I was like, “Yeah, let’s start talking about it.”

Misty: You had the moral high ground of, “Oh, my wife is coming out to me. This is me honoring someone’s queerness.” Literally a few months later, at my birthday party, there was a girl there we were really into, and the threesome happened. The next day, we were like, “Wow, that was fun. Should we download Feeld?” I do think the first conversation was deceptively easy.

Steven and Andrew talked about flirting.

Ages: 45 and 39
Open for: 7 years

>Steven: Andrew can tell me every single day that I look great, that I look sexy. And of course I want to hear those things, but there’s a difference between your husband telling you that and someone you’re not married to saying it.

Andrew: Every year, we’d go to this Christmas party. It was lots of gay men on Broadway. They were all beautiful, and it was a party full of flirting. I remember one time asking Steven afterward, “How do you feel about me flirting with other people?” Because I felt the same way Steven did — a beautiful man at that party can make me feel sexy in a way that my husband can’t. So we discussed those feelings and talked about how we both thought it was healthy. That was a gateway for us.

Eva gave Tomas an ultimatum.

Ages: 30 and 30
Open for: 8 years

Tomas: I was in Europe, she was in the U.S., and she wasn’t happy with the relationship. We got to a stage where she said, “Either we open it up or we have to break up.”

Eva: I obviously know now that in the literature there’s this idea of non-monogamy by coercion, and that isn’t great. But it was challenging to do long distance. Also, Tomas was my first serious relationship, and I had this fear that I would settle too early. I wanted to date other people.

Tomas: It was not something I ever considered. I always saw myself in a monogamous relationship and married with kids and all that. But we talked about it over a few months, which helped.

Eva: At the beginning, he thought I was trying to find a way to replace him. Over time, when he realized that wasn’t happening, he was more fine with it.

Should We Come Up With Some Rules?

When couples start being non-monogamous, there are, in general, two kinds of rules they tend to set. The first is about the structure of the arrangement. Are you seeing new people as a duo, or is it okay to pursue an outside relationship on your own? Are you remaining each other’s primary partners, or are you eliminating the hierarchy entirely? Breaking these kinds of rules can feel like a violation or at least require serious negotiation. A few years ago, Alice and her husband opened their marriage. They knew they wanted to date together and had started seeing another couple but hadn’t set firm rules. One day, the four of them were together at a food festival in Brooklyn. “I had to go off somewhere, and the other husband had to go off somewhere. So my husband and the woman were left at this food festival and ended up going back to our apartment together and then slept together,” she says. “We hadn’t clearly said, ‘No, that’s not allowed.’ It was murky. But I felt really betrayed and devastated, which I think is hard for people outside of the lifestyle to understand.”

The second kind of rules are of the more tactical, logistics-y variety. Keep your wedding ring on always, for example, or no sleepovers at home, or no more than two dates with other people per week. Nearly every couple we spoke to said that these types of rules are more like training wheels: important to set up and follow in the beginning to make everyone feel safe but likely to fall off as people get more comfortable. Brittany and Roy gave each other curfews, which they stuck to in the beginning, until needing to be home at a certain time started to make them feel constrained and they realized they didn’t really care. It became a specific request for specific circumstances, like if one of them was sick. Blake and Paula had the “no sex in the shared bed” rule for a while, “but at a certain point I was like, ‘I personally don’t care anymore whether you have sex with someone else in our bed,’” says Paula. “This does not seem important to me. ‘Go forth and let’s see how it feels.’ And then you did it and I did it. And we were both like, ‘Oh, this is fine. We don’t care.’” Some non-monogamous people are skeptical of rules in general. “I think a path for success for an open couple is to be able to be very present, treat every moment as if it’s unique,” says Robert. His partner, Olivia, adds, “If you had a set of rules, it would almost feel very strict, like monogamy.”

Where Do I Meet People?

Unless you live in Brooklyn or San Francisco (and even if you do), chances are you’re meeting people on the apps. Many default to Feeld, the non-monogamy and kink-friendly dating app, but you could do just as well somewhere like Hinge, matching only with others who label themselves non-monogamous. If you and your partner are dating separately, you might consider acting as each other’s wingman. After Toni opened her marriage, she found that she was having trouble meeting women. “I joined several apps, and nothing was really happening for me,” she says. Her husband, Tom, started matching with people he could potentially set her up with on Feeld. To one woman, Clarissa, he wrote, ‘Hey, my wife would love to speak with you separately without me, are you okay if I connect you?” then put Clarissa and Toni in a group chat. The two of them dated for a few months.

Does My Wife Want to Hear About My Night?

Some couples who date separately follow a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy — this can work well for those who like a little secrecy or just don’t want to talk about everything. But more often, couples like to share at least some details about how their respective love lives are going. Some ways to make those conversations less fraught.

Don’t debrief immediately.

“When we get home from a date with somebody else, that’s not the time to talk about it,” says Ethan, who opened his marriage three years ago. In that moment, he says, the most important thing is to reassure your partner: “Hey, I came home to you, and I want to be with you.” He adds, “Then, after some time has gone by, you can say, ‘How did the date go?’ It’s easier the second day.”

And don’t go into every detail.

Even if you and your partner want to be transparent with each other, it doesn’t necessitate giving a play-by-play. For one thing, too much information could send your partner into a spiral of anxiety or insecurity. Plus it’s not always the most considerate to the partners who aren’t in the room. “It feels a little bad to talk about every little thing you did with somebody, especially if they don’t have the ability to tell their own story,” says Blake, who has been partnered for ten years and poly for seven. “It’s just bad manners.”

But do consider sharing breakthroughs.

The one exception to Blake and his wife Paula’s rule is when they have a sexual first. “The first time I fisted someone, I was like, ‘Oh my God, Blake,’” Paula says. Another time, Blake called her with news. “I was like, ‘I fucked a guy in the butt,’” Blake says. “We celebrated.”

And findings.

“There’s one guy that I was with, and it was just a fabulous experience,” says Emily, who is married to Ethan. “I told him I couldn’t squirt. He said, ‘I am telling you, you can,’ and at the end of a four-hour session with him, I squirted for the first time.” Upon hearing about this, Ethan felt insecure. “But then I said, ‘Okay, what did he do? Let me learn,’” he says. “Now I think we need to send him Christmas cards.”

Should We Sleep With Them on the First Date?

If you’re a couple on a date with another couple, there are things to consider that you don’t have to think about as a single on a date with another single. “We’ve been a lot of couples’ first dates after they’ve opened up their relationship,” says Amelia, who frequently dates other couples with her husband, Chris. Below, the two share some advice.

Amelia: We’ve been together eight years, and it’s exciting to see that charming first-date persona anew in your partner.

Chris: But we often notice that other couples seem unsure of what they want out of the situation. We will say, “What are you guys hoping for?” And they’ll say, “We never really talked about it.” So we’re often putting the brakes on. People will want to go out for drinks, then go back to their place, and it’s like, “No, it would be better if you guys went home, processed your feelings, and then let us know if you’re both interested.” A red flag is when one partner seems overly excited and the other is pulling back. And sometimes two people just clearly want different things. So we try to really communicate — like, we’ll say, “Hey, are you in this pile of eight people because you want to be, or are you in it because you feel like you need to be?”

Amelia: When dating together, we have pretty good game: We’ll tee each other up to be charming. But sometimes we just have more of a connection with only one of the people in the couple: Our current girlfriend and boyfriend both started out as part of other couples. Things didn’t work out with the other partner, but we kept seeing them.

Am I Being Nice Enough to My Boyfriend’s Girlfriend?

If you’re not in a “don’t ask, don’t tell” situation, you may find yourself getting to know your partner’s partners, otherwise known as your metamours.

Don’t think of them as rivals.

When it comes to her husband’s girlfriends, Ali goes out of her way to avoid acting territorial. “I’m not in competition with these women. It’s not like, I’m more important because I am his wife. I am here to make sure that their needs are being met as well as mine,” she says. In the past, she’s given her phone number to new people her husband is dating in case they’re feeling unsure about him and want to talk. She’ll also intervene to make sure her husband is being a good boyfriend. “He has a girlfriend that he’s been with for two years,” she says. “I know the relationship is important, so sometimes I’ll facilitate. I’ll ask, ‘Have you FaceTimed or seen Daphne lately?’”

It’s okay to say, “Hey, this is our thing.”

Alejandra recently went on a trip upstate with Diego (her primary partner), Ivy (Diego’s partner), and Nathan (Ivy’s partner). It was the first vacation the group had taken together, and Alejandra pulled her metamour, Ivy, aside. “In bed, I refer to Diego a lot as ‘Daddy,’ and the one thing that I asked Ivy not to do in front of me on this trip was call him that because that might make me uncomfortable,” Alejandra said. “Ivy was like, ‘Oh, that’s totally fine. I’ve never called him that in my life.’ I was like, ‘Great.’”

But also, it’s not all on you.

A lot of the responsibility lies with the hinge, or mutual partner, in making sure nobody feels neglected. “When you are the middle person, you need to make sure that you’re giving equal amounts of attention to those two people,” Alejandra says. “It can be mental gymnastics: Okay, I held this person’s hand. So I have to hold this person’s hand. Oh, I gave this person a kiss. Oh, fuck, I want to make sure that everyone feels loved.” On their trip upstate, Diego, the hinge, was openly affectionate with Ivy in front of Alejandra, but later, when Alejandra began feeling insecure, he reassured her. Alejandra describes the situation: “I’m like, I’ve gained about 20 pounds, so I do not feel super-comfortable in my skin, and Ivy’s gorgeous. As soon as I felt that, I just started talking about it in front of everyone, and Diego told me some nice things, that I’m superhot and fuckable, and that’s what I needed. He did a great job. I would love to go on a little trip with them all again.”

But if your metamour is giving you a genuinely bad feeling, don’t ignore it.

Ali recalls a former metamour who grew angry after she and her husband tried to set boundaries. “She told him she had HPV, which is not a scary thing to most people, but I have a family history of cancer,” Ali says. “I said that certain sex acts are off the table, and she ended up exploding on him on his birthday while he was with his family, just keeping him on the phone for hours and hours.” The relationship ended on its own, but if it hadn’t, Ali would’ve intervened. “The language would have been, ‘I noticed so-and-so is treating you in this way, and I feel like you deserve better.’”

How Much Time Does This All Take?

You might be thinking at this point, I have a job, and a partner, and friends, and hobbies. How in the world am I going to make time for dating, and then talking about dating, on top of all of that? Some non-monogamous couples keep shared Google calendars or reserve one night a week for each other. Julia, who is in an open marriage with her husband, Matt, breaks down how they manage their week-to-week and what she’s had to give up to make room.

Matt and I have an agreement about how much time we can spend with another person weekly. Spending a whole evening out once a week, either Thursday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, is totally fine; usually, it’s after we have dinner with our young child, so from 7 p.m. till 1 a.m. And then we’re okay with each other sleeping over somewhere else once every two weeks.

Right now, I feel at capacity with one secondary partner and my husband. If my one secondary partner were way more casual, then maybe I could date two people. In order to keep my nuclear family my priority, the amount of time I put toward this other relationship has a maximum. I’d guess it takes up, or keeps me away from Matt, eight to 12 hours a week, depending on if I stay over at my partner’s or not.

I think I’ve ended up sacrificing my more introverted hobbies. So I’ve done less reading. The gardening and yard work and just a lot of home-improvement stuff I let go to the wayside. I’ve done less crafts. I think Matt has too. I know he’s put aside house projects because he needs time to go on dates. He used to do a lot more woodworking.

img class=”image-zoom-container forward” src=”https://pyxis.nymag.com/v1/imgs/13a/065/463e631053ffc925d2135da3456b17785a-coming-out-final.rvertical.w570.jpg”>

Should We Tell Our Kids?

Some poly people prefer not to tell every single person in their lives — it simply seems unnecessary, or they don’t feel like explaining or receiving judgment. Others find it more challenging, logistically and emotionally, to keep it private. (What if someone spots you out and thinks you’re cheating? Or you need to tell work you’re leaving early to pick up your partner’s child?) Writer Molly Roden Winter explains how she navigated talking to her children about her and her husband’s open marriage.

My husband and I never planned to tell our children about our open marriage. But seven years after we took our first fumbling steps toward non-monogamy, I got off a plane to find a series of text messages from my then-13-year-old son, Daniel. “Mom,” he wrote, “are you and Dad in an open marriage?” My husband, Stewart, had left his OKCupid profile open on his laptop, and Daniel had seen it.

I found a spot against the wall of the Houston airport to call him. When Daniel picked up, I began by telling him how happy his father and I were, how we were always honest with each other. But Daniel’s main question surprised me. “I get that Dad has time for it,” he asked. “But when do you do it?” This question brought me relief: Like many mothers with a full-time job, I’d worried that I wasn’t spending enough time with my children, and using precious nonworking hours to go on dates made me feel particularly guilty. Here was proof that, in Daniel’s mind at least, I was around so often he couldn’t fathom my managing to be anywhere else.

Daniel, the eldest of my two boys, had always been eminently reasonable. As an infant, he cried only when he needed something, and in elementary school, Daniel’s teachers often commented on his extraordinary comfort level with adults and his ability to mediate conflicts among his peers. With him, I had always leaned toward honesty: I’d told him about my limited drug use as a teenager, my fraught relationships with eating and body image, and my family’s history of mental illness. But speaking to my son about my sex life felt far more difficult. “I don’t do it very often,” I lied.

Daniel seemed satisfied, but over the next few weeks, once I returned to Brooklyn, he was consumed with curiosity about my whereabouts. “Where are you going?” he asked. “Are you really going to see a friend? Are you sure you’re going to the gym?” Stewart, meanwhile, continued to come and go as he pleased. “Why doesn’t Daniel ask where you’re going?” I asked Stewart one night. “Why doesn’t anyone seem to care if fathers have sex, but every mother is supposed to be the goddamn Virgin Mary?” Stewart offered to speak to Daniel, who afterward apologized to me. “I’m sorry I’ve been asking where you’re going all the time,” he said. “I know it’s private.”

“It’s okay, honey,” I answered. “It’s just that I don’t think you actually want to know if I’m on a date. And sometimes I really am just going out with friends or to the gym.” Daniel nodded. He’d try not to ask, he said, “but if I do, can you just lie if you have a date?” He seemed to agree: My dishonesty was also in his best interest.

While Daniel had always been compliant and even-tempered, his younger brother, Nate, had a penchant for emotional extremes. At the end of our phone call in the Houston airport, I’d asked Daniel to put away his father’s laptop; while he may have been mature enough to handle the truth, I hoped to keep our open marriage hidden from his younger brother as long as possible. But four years after Daniel called me in Houston, I was in my bedroom when I heard a scream from downstairs. Nate burst in with Stewart’s old iPhone in his hand. “Mom!” he shouted. “Dad’s cheating on you!” He had found pictures of Stew with his girlfriend.

Rather than asking questions stoically and matter-of-factly, as Daniel had when he first discovered Stewart’s dating profile, Nate’s eyes were wide, his breathing rapid. “Are you getting a divorce?” he asked. No, I said. He asked me who the woman was. “You don’t need to know who,” I said. “The important thing is I know who she is, and Dad isn’t cheating on me. Cheating means you lie, and Dad and I always tell each other the truth.”

There I was, standing on the same line between boundaries and honesty, exactly where I’d stood with Daniel four years earlier. Yet what I’d learned from Daniel was only halfway applicable. While Daniel was a classic introvert — often cutting discussions short in order to process his feelings alone — Nate was more like me, an extrovert who preferred to talk through complex emotions. Tell Nate too much, and he’d be anxious. Tell him too little, and he’d fill in details with his own worst fears. I checked my mind and my gut for signs of the old shame, but it registered only as a weak flicker. Calmly, I told Nate that his father and I had an open marriage. “Should we FaceTime Dad at his office?” I asked. While Stewart and I had spoken to Daniel separately when he first found out, I’d come to understand the importance of presenting a united front. Stewart and I proceeded to tell Nate our beliefs about open marriage — our commitment to each other, the emphasis on honest communication, the affirmation of each other as our life partners of choice. There was one question Nate came back to over and over again. “Just promise me you guys still really love each other,” he said.

In the months after, additional questions arose. “Are you sleeping with my orthodontist?” he asked. “No,” I responded. “Non-monogamy doesn’t mean you sleep with everyone. And I would never get involved with someone you know.”

“Cool,” he said, relieved. Then, a few days later: “Do you and Dad still like having sex with each other?” I said “yes,” to which Nate replied, “Okay, okay. Don’t say anything more!” Over time, Nate’s questions became less frequent. Stewart and I had always been affectionate with each other in front of the kids, but now I often saw Nate peeking around corners when Stew and I hugged, or jumping between us happily when we held hands on weekend outings or family vacations. And if Stewart and I fought in front of the kids, we tried to make sure they bore witness to our reconciliation as well.

Daniel, who is now an adult, recently confessed that back when he was 13, he’d been more upset about the open marriage than he’d let on. Like Nate, he’d equated open marriage with infidelity, fearing that any arrangement outside the conventions of monogamy was verboten. Would his parents stay together? Would the foundation of our family crumble beneath his feet? “It’s okay, though, Mom,” he said, registering my panic. “I’m fine with it now.” What helped, he said, was that nothing actually did change: My and Stewart’s marriage remained strong. Plus, he said, he grew up. It is tempting to believe that the choices we parents make are helping to shape our kids into confident, secure adults, but our children, ultimately, will become who they will become — maybe thanks to us, maybe in spite of us, and maybe a little bit of both.

And What About My Co-workers?

Katie Coyne, the environmental officer for the city of Austin, suggests being casual about it.

I’m married, and we’ve been poly for about two years. I have a public-facing job. It’s really important for me to feel like I’m not hiding anything about myself or hiding people who are important to me. I have it sort of worked out now. With people I’m closer with, I’ll just slide it in casually. For instance, when I was dating someone who has kids, I was going to soccer games and doing some part-time co-parenting. So at a happy hour with my staff, when someone asked what I was doing over the weekend, I said, “I’m going to my partner’s kid’s soccer game.” He was like, “Oh, I didn’t know you and your wife had kids.” I said, “Oh, we don’t. It’s my partner; I’m polyamorous.” The only person I was afraid to tell was my boss because he’s pretty religious. But the day after another partner and I broke up, we had an all-day executive-team coaching retreat. At the end of the day we were going to happy hour, and I said to him, “Hey, most of the rest of the executive team knows this about me, but I wanted to tell you that I am upset because my girlfriend and I broke up last night. I’m polyamorous.” He didn’t know how to react, but he’s adapted. A few months ago, I even took a date to a fundraiser. One of the organizers was like, “Oh, is this your partner?” And I said “No, actually, we’re on a date!” And my boss was like, “Great to meet you.” Everyone’s kind of rolling with it.

What Can Go Wrong?

More people means more interpersonal dynamics — double or triple the giddiness, maybe, but also double or triple the jealousy, anxiety, abandonment, and painful breakups.

The hierarchy might shift.

For the first five years of our open relationship, Eva and I were each other’s primary relationship. Any outside relationships never got super-serious. I was under the impression that that would always be the case. Then, two years ago, Eva met this other person and they fell in love. She started spending more nights at his house, and the relationship developed to a stage where Eva was very emotionally involved. Now her other boyfriend and I are on an equal footing in terms of the importance in the relationship. We celebrated her birthday together this year. — Tomas

You might become a third wheel.

One time, we met a girl who showed interest primarily in Ethan but said she was also interested in me. We had her over for drinks, and when things carried into the bedroom, it was clear that the focus was really him. It was our first threesome. At one point, we were talking about what we all wanted. So I said to Ethan, “What do you want? I want you to have what you want.” And he said he wanted to fuck the other girl. Then they went off to do their thing and I wasn’t involved. It hit me like a ton of bricks. I left the house. —Emily

Your partner might date someone who wants you gone.

The first time that Blake fell in love with someone else, it felt clear to me that she hoped that she would win him over and that he would leave me for her. When I met her in person, it didn’t feel to me like, Oh, she’s not ready to meet me. It felt like, She’s bummed about me. She was sad. She did not want me in the picture. Since then, I’ve met other women Blake has been in love with and it’s been great. And I’m able to look back and say, “The vibes were really off.” —Paula

They might realize they’d rather be monogamous.

We met on OKCupid and had both set ourselves as non-monogamous. We’d both just gotten out of eight-year relationships. She and her ex had decided to be non-monogamous to try to save their relationship. Over the course of ours, she basically figured out a poly relationship was not really what she wanted. I was encouraging her to date. I thought over time she’d become more comfortable. But she didn’t. She’d get really anxious and have a lot of fear and jealousy when I was trying to date. She’d say, “Hey, please don’t do this. I’m not ready for it.” There was this sense that I was somehow hurting her, and she felt like she was cheating on me when she went on dates with other people. I felt constricted. And then there was the fact that we kind of wanted different things — like, she wanted to have a child very soon. Over time, once we realized this feeling wasn’t going away, we started talking about ending the relationship. We’d do this thing sometimes where we’d lie around and scroll through OKCupid and try to find people for each other. She came across this one guy’s profile one day, and I was like, “Oh my God, you have to, like, go out with him. He’s just like me except better for you than I am.” And she did, and she ended up married to him, and they had children soon after. —Nikhil

You might tire of your secondary status.

I was dating somebody — I’ll call him Michael. And he was in a primary relationship with Michelle.

At the time, they were making a lot of space for loving other people and inviting those lovers or boyfriends into their home and on vacations with them. I was their secondary. I was very connected to them, and I very much fell in love with Michael. Michael very much fell in love with me. I was supporting Michael while he prepared to propose to Michelle. But then I went through a really rough period. I needed more emotional support than he could give me. I was impulsive and broke up with him. I knew Michelle was consoling him for many months afterward. A few years later, Michelle reached out to me. She’d asked seven of his lovers and former lovers to come surprise him for his birthday. We tied him up and throttled him in complete silence. So it was ultimately a happy ending. —Sonya

They might leave you behind.

Seven years ago, I met this woman. I was mostly monogamous and single. She was very up front that she had a boyfriend and they were open. We started dating, and for those two years, I wasn’t dating multiple people — I just was dating her, and she really just wanted one female companion and him. The beginning of the end was when her and her boyfriend’s relationship started to become codified in traditions. He proposed to her, and it threw me. It made the balance beam that I was on feel uneven and one-sided. He invited me to the wedding, but she was like, “Uh, no.” She said she didn’t want to have to explain to her family who I was at the wedding. It felt like she chose him over me, like, “You’re not fully included.” I think I saw her one more time after the wedding, but it was just awkward. —M.J.

You two might drift apart.

A few years after my husband and I opened our marriage, I met this woman. We fell in love really, really fast. One morning, after she slept over, my husband said, “Seeing you this excited about someone else really freaks me out.” But I’d seen him happy with people over the years we’d been open, so he let me give it a shot. Eventually, he even suggested she move in. Now, I live in very separate worlds with them in the same house. He’s a very tidy person. She loves to play music, cook, be messy. He’s reserved; she loves to give attention. My husband and I haven’t had sex in over a year. We love each other, but our connectedness just doesn’t run as deep as mine and hers. —Caroline

Or it might just break your relationship.

>My partner and I started dating in college, and we stayed together after. She was always interested in alternative relationship modalities, and over the years she brought it up a couple of times. I’d be like, “Okay, that’s interesting. Let me think about it.” Eventually, when we moved cities, I was like, “Why don’t we give this a shot?” In the beginning, it felt really fun. Then she got more serious with someone and it became more difficult to talk about with each other. She was never anything but transparent about the facts. I would ask her what she was doing one day, and she’d say, “Oh, I’m seeing this person.” At one point, they started taking trips together, so I knew they were getting more serious.

I felt upset and wondered if I should be doing something similar. I started looking around more on Hinge and found somebody I had amazing chemistry with. Eventually, my feelings toward her and hers toward me grew so strong that I was like, I have to make a decision. It’s gotten out of hand, emotionally. The main relationship was suffering. Neither of us was putting the same attention into that that we were into the other relationships.

I ended up breaking things off with my partner. The conversation was consuming. I feel like I’ve never been so focused on something. I walked around the city for days and days thinking, What should I do? At one point, she asked, “Well, would you change your mind if I ended things with the other person?” I said, “Honestly, I don’t know. The cat’s kind of out of the bag.” And she said, “Well, honestly, I don’t know whether I’d be able to do it and hurt the other person in this way.” I don’t know if we’d have stayed together if we’d stayed closed. Or if it would have been the right decision to stay together. —Lucas

All names have been changed at the request of the subjects.

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

March 19, 2024March 18, 2024

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↩!

March 13, 2024March 12, 2024

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 80^th 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↩!

March 7, 2024March 6, 2024

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?

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.

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↩!

February 21, 2024February 20, 2024

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

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

By Aryelle Siclait and Lydia Wang

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↩!

February 10, 2024February 9, 2024

You’re ‘Solo Poly’? So … You’re Single?

— Not quite, according to practitioners, who want people to understand that the lifestyle is more than a dressed-up “friends with benefits.”

It’s like dating, but slightly different.

By Gina Cherelus

After James Nicholson went through a breakup in October, he realized that he was at a point in his life when he wanted to focus more on himself than on someone else, but without losing the perks of romantic intimacy.

He was juggling work and grief from losing a family member, all while parenting a 14-year-old with his ex-wife. So Mr. Nicholson, a 46-year-old Bronx resident, decided to embark on a journey of solo polyamory. To Mr. Nicholson, that meant dating several people at once with no intention to ride the relationship escalator to the top.

“I’m open to connecting with others, but it may not be just one other person,” he said in a phone interview. “It is really based on how schedules line up.”

It’s hard to miss the growing interest these days in polyamory and ethical non-monogamy, the term du jour for having multiple and consensual romantic relationships. The new year kicked off with a slew of articles on the subject from a number of publications that shed light on the practice and lifestyle.

But among all the throuples, polycules and nesting partners, there exists another category of polyamory that still throws many for a loop: solo polyamory, or having concurrent intimate relationships while maintaining independence. For the solo poly, the end goal is not an exclusive partnership, marriage, shared finances or cohabitation.

The concept becomes a little less confusing when you break the term up. Solo? You’re your No. 1 focus. Poly? You’re interested in seeing several people at once. The specific details will vary from person to person.

In interviews with people who identify as solo poly, many described facing misconceptions about their lifestyle. Two of the chief distinctions that separates them from other singles who are dating is that solo poly relationships rely heavily on communication and transparency, and they aren’t defined by the end goal of finding a soul mate. And unlike other polyamorous relationships, their partners don’t interact.

For most people who are dating, “you’re single, maybe dating someone, and you don’t tell them about other people you’re dating,” Mr. Nicholson said. “There might be a lot more discretion, shall we say, with how you communicate with whoever you’re dating.”

One thing to be aware of when it comes to being solo poly, according to Mr. Nicholson, is that if you are prioritizing yourself, then you should expect the same treatment: “No one is going to specifically prioritize you.”

Tyomi Morgan, 36, a certified sexologist in Atlanta, was living the solo poly lifestyle long before she discovered the term, in 2016.

“Fourteen years ago, I did not have this language,” she said in a phone interview. “It was not in my awareness at all. It does feel fairly new.”

“I just know that having an open lifestyle was a thing,” she continued, “and I decided instead of being monogamous that I would be non-monogamous, and I would be transparent about that with people in my life.”

As these types of lifestyles gain steam — a 2023 YouGov poll found that one-third of Americans described their ideal relationship as something other than complete monogamy — some people have responded with skepticism to the idea of solo polyamory, writing it off as just a new label for being single and casually dating or sleeping around.

“I hate my generation of men,” one woman posted on X. “What do you mean you’re solo poly and straight? … That’s literally just a man.”

Solo poly? “Bruh, I think you mean single,” another wrote. “You just *have* to have a special little identity for every corner of your romantic life.”

For Ms. Morgan, being solo poly means there’s no expectation for her to live with any of her partners and she’s at the center of all her relationships, which include a long-distance relationship, a few more meaningful partnerships and some casual connections. She said she didn’t love any one of her partners more or less than another.

“I experience so much freedom and happiness in being solo and just prioritizing myself first,” she said. “As somebody who’s a recovering codependent and people pleaser, it feels good to center myself in relationships and not feel like I have this hard obligation to necessarily be with a particular group of people.”

The hardest part of being solo poly, in Ms. Morgan’s experience, has been maintaining healthy emotional regulation and staying aware of her own needs in the midst of it all.

So is “solo poly” a helpful label, a way to be more transparent with romantic and sexual partners? Or is it just another unnecessary term to describe behaviors that have long existed? For Mr. Nicholson, the label helps him clearly define exactly the type of single he is for the time being.

The label sets a tone that he hopes can encourage “healthy, open, transparent connection and communication,” he said, “for whoever I’m dealing with on an ongoing basis.”

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

February 3, 2024February 2, 2024

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

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↩!

January 31, 2024February 10, 2024

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↩!

January 25, 2024January 24, 2024

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.

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↩!

January 22, 2024January 21, 2024

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↩!

January 14, 2024January 13, 2024

How a Polyamorous Mom Had ‘a Big Sexual Adventure’ and Found Herself

— In her memoir, “More,” Molly Roden Winter recounts the highs and lows of juggling an open marriage with work and child care.

“In a place like Brooklyn, you would think there would be just more sexual freedom,” said Molly Roden Winter, “but it’s reserved for people who are not moms.”

By Alexandra Alter

For anyone prone to experiencing secondhand embarrassment, there’s a scene in Molly Roden Winter’s debut, “More: A Memoir of Open Marriage,” that should come with a warning.

Winter is at her home in Brooklyn. She has just had sex with her boyfriend while her two children sleep upstairs. Her husband, Stewart, consented to her tryst, but feeling guilty, she dashes naked into the kitchen to text him: Don’t worry, she writes, “he has nothing on you as a lover.” But instead of texting her husband, she accidentally sends the message to her boyfriend, who leaves in a huff, and later breaks up with her. Winter, devastated, begs her husband to come home to comfort her.

“I still get a little nauseous thinking about it,” said Winter, 51, who was sipping tea in the living room of her bright and airy townhouse in Park Slope, Brooklyn. “Talk about the cringiest, cringiest, most awful thing that could happen.”

It’s far from the only agonizing and breathtakingly candid scene in “More,” which documents Winter’s often turbulent experience of open marriage — the resentment and jealousy she felt toward her husband’s girlfriends, the flashes of guilt and shame, and the challenges of juggling her obligations as a wife and mother with her pursuit of sexual and romantic fulfillment.

Winter is keenly aware that people may judge her for the behavior she describes in “More.” But she also said she felt compelled to write about her experience, in part because she felt that non-monogamy is so often depicted as something happening on the fringes, not as a lifestyle that married moms pursue.

“I felt like there were no stories from the mainstream about it, and I felt very closeted,” Winter said. “It often feels like mothers are not supposed to be sexual beings.”

“More,” which Doubleday will release on Jan. 16, is landing at a moment when polyamory is drifting from the margins to the mainstream. About a third of Americans surveyed in a YouGov poll in February of 2023 said they preferred some form of non-monogamy in relationships.

The cover of this book is rust orange, with the title, “More” in all-caps dark blue letters. Below it is a stylized lilac flower, with some bees hovering. Below that is the subtitle, “A Memoir of Open Marriage.” in white. The author’s name, Molly Roden Winter, is below that.

Along with novels, TV shows and movies that depict throuples, polycules and other permutations of open relationships, there is a growing body of nonfiction literature that explores the ethics and logistical hurdles of polyamory. Recent titles include memoirs like the journalist Rachel Krantz’s 2022 book “Open: An Uncensored Memoir of Love, Liberation, and Non-Monogamy,” and self-help and inspirational books like “The Anxious Person’s Guide to Non-Monogamy,” “The Polyamory Paradox” and “A Polyamory Devotional,” which has 365 daily reflections for the polyamorous.

Jessica Fern, a psychotherapist who counsels people in open relationships, said Winter’s account adds a new layer to the growing catalog of nonfiction about polyamory.

“Her story, which is about what it means for a mother to be erotically charged, that story I haven’t seen enough yet,” said Fern, author of “Polysecure” and “Polywise.”

Fern noted that there might be a scarcity of books by moms in open marriages because they are simply too busy: “When you’re a parent and you’re polyamorous, who has time to write?”

Winter concedes that polyamory could be exhausting — particularly when she had to balance it with marriage, child care and working as an 8th grade English teacher.

“I did not sleep very much,” she said.

Opening the marriage wasn’t just about doing whatever — and whoever — she wanted, she said. She had to cast off internalized sexism and her tendency to put others’ needs before her own, issues she worked through in therapy. What began as sexual thrill-seeking led unexpectedly to self-discovery.

“I thought non-monogamy was going to be all about the sex,” she said. “I thought I was going on a big sexual adventure, and it was going to be super exciting. And it was, until it wasn’t.”

To be clear: “More” is also about the sex. Winter recounts her experiments with butt plugs, fisting and anal intercourse, and catalogs her extramarital relationships — which range from brief encounters in seedy hotel rooms to romantic partnerships that last for years — in meticulous detail. She changed the names of her and her husband’s respective partners to protect their privacy, but often leaves little else to the imagination.

There’s “Karl,” the generous German lover who seems intent on pleasing her in bed, then pushes her to have a threesome with him and his fiancé, then ghosts her. There’s “Laurent,” the French-Argentine lover who refuses to wear condoms and likes to have sex in public restrooms and co-working spaces — a fetish that gets Winter banned for life from a shared office space.

And there’s “Jay,” a 29-year-old with a shockingly large penis. After they have unsatisfying sex, Jay tells Winter he usually can’t orgasm from intercourse, but that he plans to masturbate to the memory of her. “You’re sweet,” she tells him.

Stewart Winter is standing behind his wife, Roden Winter, and embracing her. — Many of Stewart’s friends are skeptical of his open marriage, he said. “My male friends don’t know how to deal with it,” he said. “They think it’s like swingers, like we’re all sitting around in bathrobes with martinis.”

Winter grew up in Evanston, Ill., and was in her early 20s when she met Stewart Winter, the man she would marry. He made her laugh and was passionate about his work composing music for TV shows and movies.

In 2008, they had been married for nearly a decade and had two young sons when Winter met someone else. Frustrated after an exhausting day caring for their boys while he worked late, she took a walk one evening. A friend invited her to drinks, and at the bar she fell into a flirtatious conversation with a man.

When she told her husband later, to her surprise, he wasn’t mad. Instead, he urged her to sleep with her new acquaintance, and share the details.

After Winter started dating, it wasn’t long before Stewart also started seeing other women. Though she agreed it was only fair, she was consumed by jealousy and occasionally asked to close the marriage.

Stewart confirmed that open marriage was easier for him at first.

“Molly might have been more discerning than I was at that point,” he said, comparing his dating experience to being “at a salad bar.”

In the early years, many of her sexual exploits proved unsatisfying. At the time, most online dating sites didn’t cater to polyamorous people, so she sometimes resorted to dating men who were cheating on their wives and girlfriends. “Not my finest hour,” she said.

Some of her closest friends worried that she was sabotaging her marriage and that she would get hurt.

“I worried that she was leaning so heavily into the sex part that she was not really thinking about the emotional element,” said Rebecca Morrissey, a friend of more than 25 years, who added that her concerns faded when Winter started forming healthier relationships with her paramours.

Eventually, Winter swore off men who were cheating and began seeing people who were also in open relationships, a demographic that became easier to find when online dating services added non-monogamous to their menus. Even then, options were limited.

“There were so few people that I kept getting paired with Stewart,” she said.

In this portrait, Roden Winter is leaning against the sill of a large window with tall bookcases rising on either side of her. — “The bad sex taught me a lot more about what makes sex good,” Roden Winter said. “I also wanted to tell the truth about how hard it was.”

Winter and her husband struggled with when and how to tell their sons about their arrangement, and wanted to wait until their children were mature enough to handle it. That plan failed when their oldest son, then 13, saw his dad’s online dating profile on his laptop, and texted his mother in a panic, asking if they were in an open marriage. Her youngest son found out in a similar way a few years ago, when he was 14, she said.

By now, her sons, who are 19 and 21, are blasé about their parents’ sex lives. Her oldest has read her book, and told Winter he skipped some of the “nitty-gritty” sex scenes, while her youngest chose not to read it, she said.

It took a few years before Winter felt comfortable revealing the details of her open marriage to a larger circle of friends and family.

When she told her mother about her adventures in non-monogamy, she learned more about how her parents, who have been married for nearly 60 years, also had an open marriage.

Her parents, Mary and Philip Roden, were a bit uncomfortable with the intimate details their daughter shares in her memoir, but ultimately endorsed the book, they said in a video interview.

“For the most part, I totally approved of what she was saying,” Mary Roden said, though she noted that she was put off by “the raw sexual detailed descriptions.”

For his part, Stewart is enthusiastic about the memoir, but worries that people will think he manipulated his wife into opening their marriage.

“All my reservations, to be perfectly honest, are because I’m being selfish, wondering, how is this going to make me look?” he said.

“More” ends in 2018, when Winter’s boyfriend, whose wife had recently divorced him, broke up with her after she turned down his ultimatum to end her own marriage. Winter was heartbroken, but moved on, and has had other serious romances since.

She’s grown more confident that her marriage of 24 years has benefited from their outside relationships. She’s mulling another book about her open marriage — which will in part explore the surprising connections she’s formed with the “other women” in her life, including Stewart’s girlfriends and the wives of the men she dates.

For now, Winter is bracing herself for the impact the book will inevitably have on her and those around her — but she seemed undaunted.

“I’ve been spending a lot of my time calming everybody else down,” she said. “This doesn’t feel like something I need to be afraid of.”

Complete Article ↪HERE↩!

December 16, 2023December 15, 2023

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↩!

December 10, 2023December 9, 2023

How to have a good threesome

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

By Ashley Couto

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↩!

November 22, 2023November 21, 2023

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

– But its sexual utopia is oversimplified

By Andrea Waling

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.

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 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↩!

November 14, 2023November 13, 2023

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.”

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.

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↩!

— How to open things up, for the curious couple.

Is There Only One Way to Do It?

There are many, and choosing which one suits you depends on a lot of factors: Are you currently in a relationship? If you are, do you want other relationships to take equal priority? Do you want to fall in love with other people or just have sex with them? A non-exhaustive taxonomy.

Wait, What Is a ‘Metamour’?

Becoming non-monogamous doesn’t mean you have to join a ten-person polycule or memorize ‘The Ethical Slut.’ Still, there are terms that many non-monogamous people will use while discussing their arrangements, and it’ll make things easier to familiarize yourself with at least a few.

How Do I Broach This With My Partner?

There are so many ways this conversation could go wrong. So we asked three couples who handled it well — and one who might have handled it better — to tell us how they first proposed it.

Julia told Matt she had a crush.

Misty reminded Ari of an old conversation.

Steven and Andrew talked about flirting.

Eva gave Tomas an ultimatum.

Should We Come Up With Some Rules?

Where Do I Meet People?

Does My Wife Want to Hear About My Night?

Don’t debrief immediately.

And don’t go into every detail.

But do consider sharing breakthroughs.

And findings.

Should We Sleep With Them on the First Date?

Am I Being Nice Enough to My Boyfriend’s Girlfriend?

If you’re not in a “don’t ask, don’t tell” situation, you may find yourself getting to know your partner’s partners, otherwise known as your metamours.

Don’t think of them as rivals.

It’s okay to say, “Hey, this is our thing.”

But also, it’s not all on you.

But if your metamour is giving you a genuinely bad feeling, don’t ignore it.

How Much Time Does This All Take?

Should We Tell Our Kids?

And What About My Co-workers?

Katie Coyne, the environmental officer for the city of Austin, suggests being casual about it.

What Can Go Wrong?

More people means more interpersonal dynamics — double or triple the giddiness, maybe, but also double or triple the jealousy, anxiety, abandonment, and painful breakups.

The hierarchy might shift.

You might become a third wheel.

Your partner might date someone who wants you gone.

They might realize they’d rather be monogamous.

You might tire of your secondary status.

They might leave you behind.

You two might drift apart.

Or it might just break your relationship.

— In defense of non-monogamy.

— A talk with poly fairy grandmother Dossie Easton

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

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

how humans mate

TRADEOFFS AND CULTURE

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

What is a throuple relationship?

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

Why might someone want to be in a throuple?

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

What are some tips for being in a healthy throuple?

1. Make sure you set ground rules first.

2. Continue to communicate.

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

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

What are some of the myths about throuples?

1. They’re purely sexual relationships.

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

3. They’re not natural.

— Not quite, according to practitioners, who want people to understand that the lifestyle is more than a dressed-up “friends with benefits.”

— Polyamory has only made my family stronger.

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

During his surgery, I considered reaching out to his ex

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

1. Is Something Missing In Our Relationship?

2. What Will People Think Of Us?

3. Will This Change Our Relationship?

— According To Non-Monogamous People

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

“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

There are four main types of non-monogamous relationships.

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

“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

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

— In her memoir, “More,” Molly Roden Winter recounts the highs and lows of juggling an open marriage with work and child care.

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

What makes for a great threesome

How to find a third

The right position will vary with each threesome

Double cowgirl

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

“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

“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

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