Countering the ‘monogamy-superiority’ myth: Relationship satisfaction, stigma and health education implications

This study examined the frequency of partner-directed mate retention behaviors and several self- and partner-rated romantic relationship evaluations (i.e., sociosexuality, relationship satisfaction, mate value, and partner ideal measures) within monogamous and consensually non-monogamous (CNM) relationships. Measures were compared (1) between monogamous and CNM participants and (2) between two concurrent partners within each CNM relationship (i.e., primary and secondary partners). We found that individuals in currently monogamous relationships (n=123) performed more mate retention behaviors compared to those currently in CNM relationships (n=76). Within CNM relationships, participants reported engaging in more mate retention behaviors with primary partners compared to secondary partners. Likewise, CNM participants reported talking about their extra-dyadic sexual experiences and downplaying these sexual experiences more often with their primary partner compared to their secondary partner. There were no significant differences between ratings of monogamous and primary partners in participants' overall relationship satisfaction. However, monogamous participants reported less satisfaction with the amount of communication and openness they had with their partner compared to CNM participants' reports of their primary partner, but not secondary partner. By comparison, CNM participants reported higher overall relationship satisfaction with primary compared to secondary partners and considered their primary partner to be more desirable as a long-term mate than their secondary partner. We interpret these results within the context of previous research on monogamous and CNM relationships and hypothesize that these relationship configurations are alternative strategies for pursuing a strategically pluralistic mating strategy.

Approximately 4% of individuals in North America participate in consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships, wherein all partners have agreed to additional sexual and/or emotional partnerships. The CNM relationships are stigmatized and viewed as less stable and satisfying than monogamous relationships, a perception that persists despite research evidence. In our study, we assess the legitimacy of this negative perception by using a self-determination theory (SDT) framework to explore how sexual motivation impacts relational and sexual satisfaction among CNM and monogamous participants in romantic relationships. A total of 348 CNM ( n = 142) and monogamous participants ( n = 206) were recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk. (2016). www.mturk.com ) to complete a cross-sectional survey. Participants reported on their sexual motivations during their most recent sexual event, their level of sexual need fulfillment, and measures of sexual and relational satisfaction with their current (primary) partner. The CNM and monogamous participants reported similar reasons for engaging in sex, though CNM participants were significantly more likely to have sex for personal intrinsic motives. No differences in mean levels of relationship and sexual satisfaction were found between CNM and monogamous individuals. Participants who engaged in sex for more self-determined reasons reported increased relational and sexual satisfaction. This relationship was mediated by sexual need fulfillment; participants who reported more self-determined motives reported higher levels of need fulfillment and, in turn, greater relationship and sexual satisfaction. This study indicates that CNM and monogamous individuals report similar levels of satisfaction within their relationship(s) and that the mechanisms that affect relational and sexual satisfaction are similar for both CNM and monogamous individuals. Our research extends theoretical understandings of motivation within romantic relationships and suggests that SDT is a useful framework for considering the impact of sexual motivation on relational outcomes.

Although consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are presumed to be far riskier for partners' sexual health compared with monogamous relationships, the disparity between them may be smaller than assumed. A growing body of research finds that many partners who have made monogamy agreements cheat, and when they do, they are less likely to practice safe sex than CNM partners. Extant comparisons of monogamous and CNM relationships are rare and have yet to establish whether rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and STI testing differ between these groups. The present research compared self-reported STI history, lifetime number of sex partners, and condom use practices among monogamous and CNM partners. Participants (N = 556) were recruited for an online survey of "attitudes toward sexual relationships." Approximately two-thirds of the sample reported current involvement in a monogamous relationship, with the remainder indicating involvement in a CNM relationship. All participants completed a questionnaire that included measures of condom use practices with primary and extra-pair partners, as well as their STI history. CNM partners reported more lifetime sexual partners than individuals in monogamous relationships. In addition, compared with monogamous partners, CNM partners were more likely to (i) report using condoms during intercourse with their primary partner; (ii) report using condoms during intercourse with extradyadic partners; and (iii) report having been tested for STIs. Approximately one-quarter of monogamous partners reported sex outside of their primary relationship, most of whom indicated that their primary partner did not know about their infidelity. The percentage of participants reporting previous STI diagnoses did not differ across relationship type. CNM partners reported taking more precautions than those in monogamous relationships in terms of greater condom use during intercourse with all partners and a higher likelihood of STI testing. Thus, although persons in CNM relationships had more sexual partners, the precautions they took did not appear to elevate their rate of STIs above an imperfect implementation of monogamy. Lehmiller JJ. A comparison of sexual health history and practices among monogamous and consensually nonmonogamous sexual partners.

In the context of recent debates about same‐sex marriage, consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships have recently begun making their way into media discussions. In the current research, we investigated whether stigma is attached to these nonnormative romantic relationships and, conversely, whether halo effects surround monogamous relationships. In Study 1 we analyzed open‐ended responses to the question “what are the benefits of monogamy?”. The most commonly mentioned benefits included the promotion of commitment and health (especially the prevention of sexually transmitted infections [STIs]). In Study 2, descriptions of CNM relationships were strongly stigmatized and a substantial halo effect surrounded monogamous relationships. Specifically, monogamous relationships were rated more positively than CNM relationships on every dimension (both relationship‐relevant and arbitrary relationship‐irrelevant factors) that we examined and across diverse social groups, including CNM individuals themselves. In Study 3, we conducted a person perception study in which participants provided their impressions of a monogamous or a CNM relationship. The monogamous couple was rated overwhelmingly more favorably than the CNM relationship. Finally, in Study 4, we replicated the findings with a set of traits that were generated with regard to relationships in general (rather than monogamous relationships, specifically) and with a broader set of arbitrary traits. Across all studies, the results consistently demonstrated stigma surrounding CNM and a halo effect surrounding monogamy. Implications for future research examining similarities and differences between monogamous and CNM relationships are discussed.

Editor's note

Inaccurate stigmas and stereotypes may prevent individuals involved in consensual nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships from getting the counseling they seek when facing relational issues. Misperceptions regarding the satisfaction level of individuals in CNM relationships may perpetuate stereotypes and complicate therapeutic care. The current research attempted to determine the satisfaction levels of those involved in CNM relationships using the Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS) and the Relational Assessment Questionnaire. Results of N = 150 find a mean of 4.12 (0.76) on the RAS for the CNM group indicating no difference in satisfaction between the CNM sample and individuals identifying as monogamous. This research offers important considerations for counselors in reviewing biases and judgments they may hold in working with this population and contributes to the dearth of literature on CNM populations.

We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.

Interest in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships is increasing in both the public and the media. It is estimated between 4–5% of the U.S. population is currently involved in a CNM relationship with even distribution across racial/ethnic groups (Conley, Moors, Matsick, & Ziegler, 2013; Haritaworn, Lin, & Klesse, 2006; Klesse, 2014; Sheff & Hammers, 2011). Although public interest in CNM is increasing (Moors, 2016; Balzarini et al., 2018), much bias against CNM relationships still exists among the general public (Lehmiller, 2017). This paper will analyze and discuss a portrayal of a Black CNM relationship in Season 2 of the HBO series Insecure (Rae et al., 2016-present). Ultimately, the paper will discuss the importance of accurate representation of CNM relationships in Black media.

The purpose of this review is to highlight the major advancements in our understanding of consensually non-monogamous (CNM) relationships—or intimate relationships between three or more people who are non-exclusive sexually and/or emotionally. We aim to review key insights from research on the benefits (i.e., diversification of need fulfillment) and challenges (i.e., continued stigma) of CNM relationships and how research on CNM highlights some limitations of the existing theories of relationships. The last two decades have seen a trend towards increasing diversity of family structures. Although monogamy remains the most common relationship structure, CNM relationships are increasing in prevalence and in interest to both lay people and researchers. Recent research has begun to uncover novel insights into who is more likely to be drawn to and engage in CNM, how CNM relationships compare to monogamous relationships, and the potential benefits and challenges of engaging in CNM relationships. While people in CNM relationships still experience stigma, for those who desire such relationships, CNM can be a viable and healthy alternative to monogamy, and may even help people meet more of their needs through diversifying need fulfillment across multiple partners. Despite this, many existing relationship theories are not inclusive of CNM relationship experiences and aspects of existing theories of positive relationships and sexuality may not extend to people in CNM relationships. Moving forward it is important to consider whether our concepts and measures are inclusive to people in diverse relationships, including those in CNM relationships.

Conley and colleagues’ recent article identifying consensual nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships as stigmatized in American society made a significant contribution to the domain of relationships research. However, definitions and operationalizations of monogamous and consensual nonmonogamous relationships in their research left us with questions about the generalizability of the conclusions and with ambiguity about the specific policies they view as in need of modification in order to accommodate CNM relationships. While “The Fewer the Merrier” does shed some light on an understudied population, in order for significant advances to be made in understanding the public policy needs of the CNM group it is important to be specific about which groups are being discussed.

Sexual Motivation and Satisfaction Among Consensually Non-Monogamous and Monogamous Individuals

Consensual nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships (e.g., open relationships) are common among adult gay and bisexual men, and thus, younger gay and bisexual men may also engage in consensual nonmonogamy. Yet little is known about CNM relationships among young gay and bisexual men. This is problematic, as nonmonogamy may have important implications for relationship health, which is linked to individual mental and physical health. The present study explored dimensions of relationship quality among a sample of ( n = 20) young gay and bisexual men in CNM relationships. Participants were recruited, along with their primary partners, from an ongoing cohort study of young men who have sex with men in New York City. Participants completed semistructured interviews that included questions about relationship quality. A modified version of the consensual qualitative research method was used to analyze the data. Participants’ responses were also analyzed at the dyad level to assess agreement between partners on dimensions of relationship quality. Among the men interviewed, most reported being satisfied with their relationship with their primary partner and with nonmonogamy more generally. Many participants identified improvements in their overall relationship, communication, and sex life as a result of nonmonogamy. These findings suggest that CNM relationships are viable relationship structures for some young gay and bisexual men. Consistent with these findings, mental health practitioners should help young gay and bisexual men in CNM relationships to bolster their communication and conflict resolution skills and should avoid pathologizing nonmonogamy. Also, medical providers and HIV/sexually transmitted infections (STI) prevention programs may benefit from increased competence regarding consensual nonmonogamy and should tailor their services to the unique needs of young gay and bisexual men in CNM relationships.

Monogamy is deeply rooted in most Western societies, shaping how people construe and behave in romantic relationships. These normative views facilitate the emergence of negative perceptions and evaluations when people choose not to adhere to mononormativity. Even though people in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships are targets of stigmatization, research shows a dichotomy between these negative views and the relational experiences of CNM people. Indeed, people in CNM and monogamous relationships have comparable relationship functioning and quality and struggle with similar relationship problems. One of the differences is that CNM relationships afford people to explore their sexuality and fulfill their needs with multiple partners, without agreed-upon extradyadic behavior being perceived as infidelity or having deleterious consequences to relationship maintenance. These positive experiences notwithstanding, CNM people are continuously pressured by mononormativity and stigmatization, increasing the risk of internalized CNM negativity and worse personal and relational outcomes. One possible way to counteract CNM stigmatization and improve the lives of CNM people is by changing discourses surrounding non-monogamy and improving acceptance, not only in professional settings but also in the general population. Another strategy is to understand how the relationship beliefs and scripts of younger generations can help promote more inclusive and diverse societies.

Research has typically shown that unrestricted sociosexuality is negatively associated with relationship quality and that relationship quality is positively associated with quality of life (QoL). However, these findings may be restricted to individuals in monogamous relationships, especially those with prior extradyadic interactions (i.e., non-consensual non-monogamous; NCNM). Indeed, individuals in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships have more unrestricted sociosexuality and are also more satisfied with and committed to their relationships. Still, little research has examined whether both relationship agreements are associated differently with attraction forces (wanting to be) and constraining forces (having to be) in the relationship and how they are related to QoL. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 373 heterosexuals (73.2% men, Mage = 41.15, SD = 10.18) registered on Second Love, a dating Web site for romantically involved individuals. Results showed differences in the hypothesized model, according to relationship agreement. For individuals in CNM relationships, unrestricted sociosexuality was associated with stronger attraction forces, which were then associated with greater QoL. The opposite pattern was found for those in NCNM relationships. Furthermore, and regardless of relationship agreement, unrestricted sociosexuality was associated with weaker constraining forces, which were associated with greater QoL. These results make a novel contribution to the literature on relationship agreements and how they relate to QoL.

Consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships include a variety of relational types that allow for multiple sexual or romantic partners. Although many CNM dynamics occur, the most commonly addressed by both research and popular media include swinging relationships, open relationships, and polyamorous relationships. Many people practice some form of CNM at some point in time, with some estimates suggesting approximately one in five people will be involved in some kind of CNM relational dynamic at some point in their lifetime. At the core of their relational practices, many CNM relationships center communication, openness, and honesty. Despite this, CNM relationships have received less attention from communication researchers comparative to other social science disciplines. CNM relational practices are independent of other relational identities, but may intersect with other identities such as sexual orientation or those who practice kink or bondage, domination, and sadomasochism. The interdisciplinary research literature on relational communication and CNM examines relational maintenance behaviors in CNM relationships, primarily polyamorous relationships, relational communication and jealousy in multiple partner dynamics, polyamorous identity disclosure, and intercultural communication in polyamorous communities. CNM relational communication practices emphasize relational maintenance behavior in multiple-partner dynamics and how jealousy may be communicatively managed in CNM relationships.