A Therapist's Guide to Consensual Nonmonogamy

Polyamory, Swinging, and Open Marriage

Rhea Orion

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781315462233
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Psychotherapy
• Index: Psychology

Consensual nonmonogamy (CNM) means that all partnersin a relationship consent to expanded monogamy or polyamory. Clinicians are on the front line in providing support for the estimated millions pioneering these modern relationships. This first available guide for therapists provides answers to prevalent questions: What is the difference between expanded monogamy and polyamory? Is CNM healthy and safe? Why would someone choose the complexities of multiple partners? What about the welfare of children? Through illustrative case studies from research and clinical practice, therapists will learn to assist clients with CNM agreements, jealousy, sex, time, family issues, and much more. A Therapist's Guide to Consensual Nonmonogamy serves as a step forward toward expanding standard clinical training and helps inform therapists who wish to serve the CNM population.

Part I

Definitions and Social Issues

1 The Magical Story of Monogamy

Consensual nonmonogamy, a term developed over several decades of growing practice, is an emerging model responding to human and cultural change. To understand nonmonogamy, we must understand monogamy and what has happened culturally to bring about its opposite.

Traditional monogamous marriage is hinged on that formal vow of complete faithfulness. “Without the sex,” I hear frequently from couples whose sex life has disappeared, “what’s the difference between being married and being roommates?”

The nuclear family is a model that emerged during the Baby Boomer years: a heterosexual couple and their biological children, one spouse employed outside the home and the other a full-time caretaker. Some estimates are that as few as 13% of families actually live this way. As of the year 2000, stepfamilies are the most common form; there is no typical family (Mackay, 2000; Strong & DeVault, 1992).

Despite well-known statistics on the prevalence of divorce, millions of couples a year flock to the altar, in white gowns and tuxedos, to say vows. A “halo effect” surrounding monogamy in American culture supports the perpetuation of desire and positive regard for monogamous relationship structures (Conley, Moors, Matsick, & Ziegler, 2013; Moors, Matsick, Ziegler, Rubin, & Conley, 2013). Weddings are very big business. Details vary, but whether implicit or explicit, sexual monogamy ‘til death do us part remains the crux of being wed. Sick or well, rich or poor, we also vow to stand by one another. But if either partner breaks the vow of exclusivity—that often overrides the contract and leads to divorce.

At least in modern times, that is. Historically, men got away with a lot of cheating, but women, as the legal property of the husband, did not. Whether a couple had sex or how often was not a topic of discussion. It was the female’s duty, the man’s presumed need and right.

Thanks to massive cultural changes brought about by feminism and hippies, this forced sexual monogamy and double standard are not even remembered by a couple of generations. Unless they study history of marriage and family, today’s young couples would be shocked if they had to go back and live in an earlier era.

The modern idea of marriage, or “supermonogamy” (Emens, 2004), is a powerful fairy tale permeating our society. With the freedom and equality brought about by social evolution, one might think that being married would bring less pressure, that requirements would be relaxed. Instead, the list of expectations inherent in the modern marriage has grown considerably: Not only is sexual exclusivity still a mainstream expectation, but sex is supposed to be desired equally, to be frequent and exciting with numerous orgasms for both partners.

As the modern nuclear couple who can do it all, spouses are both expected to work and manage careers, buy homes, be parents, and take care of elders, for as long as the seventy-plus years either spouse may now live. This supermonogamy is current socialization, yet there is nothing in science or nature to suggest that these expanded expectations can be fulfilled.

We don’t see what happens after the wedding when Cinderella and the prince arrive in the bedroom. If Cinderella has sexual pain or the prince has erectile dysfunction, if either one is gay or polyamorous by nature, what then? Our media princess models have improved, providing us with female warriors and leaders who save others and have complex powerful jobs. Their princes may or may not have advanced much from traditionally depicted roles, but the idea still stands that once together with the right one, everything will be great forever.

What if there is a likely deterioration of this ideal couple’s sex life? Or they just don’t get along as well as they thought they would, now that they’re married? The prince wants a family but Cinderella feels overwhelmed with children and wifely duties. Maybe they could both use a second spouse as part of the equation! (When does such a movie plot come out?) Research and evidence suggest that millions of people worldwide are actually living that plot, whether or not it is discussed, accepted, or depicted (Cloud, 1999; Emens, 2004; Haupert, Gesselman, Moors, Fisher, & Garcia, 2016; King, 2017; Lovemore.com, 2007; Orion, 2008a, 2011). This is emerging cultural change.

Monogamous marriage is a powerful story full of magic. Research shows that in modern America the couple is prioritized as one of the most important relationships in one’s life, and it is presumed that nearly everyone desires monogamy (Day, Kay, Holmes, & Napier, 2011; DePaulo & Morris, 2005; Haupert, et al., 2016). Monogamy once meant survival and was prescribed by religion and law. People are no longer forced into this mode. But many believe in the Cinderella magic and follow that dream. Since it is clear that this model of marriage so often doesn’t work, what magic is the ongoing power of the story?

Though laws have changed somewhat and various religions and spiritual movements now abound, there remains a natural desire to pair bond: a powerful instinct to mate and create a secure nest. Love is necessary to survival—and makes living worthwhile. Who wants to face loneliness, pain, and loss? Or feel unsafe or insecure? The magic of the story of monogamy is that it promises what we need and prevention of loss—all while having sex with a mate one can count on!

This is a wonderful, humane story! Who wouldn’t want it to come true? Unfortunately, it so often proves untrue. It is not the right story for everyone. It is a tale based neither on science nor on nature. The Cinderella magic is the residue of thousands of years of patriarchy, of no separation between church and state, and of our human tendency to carry on in adulthood as childhood taught.

Modern couples are potentially pioneering the development of new models for successful relationships and familyways. Today’s monogamous couples seek love-based, egalitarian monogamy by choice, not by force or law; we might call this consensual monogamy, as opposed to the forced and unquestioned monogamy of western history. Carrying out this choice requires information, hard work, communication skills, establishment of rules and boundaries, personal growth, time, energy, maintenance of intimacy, and commitment. This is the same list required for carrying out successful nontraditional partnerships. Both are legitimate and viable models for modern life. Traditional relationships are changing; new relationship formats are emerging, including new models of monogamy.

My experience is that many committed sexually monogamous couples are unwittingly relying on what they think is normal human behavior, based on their cultural upbringing. But neither instinct nor socialization supports fulfillment of high modern marital expectations.

Problems exist when couples marry without having the tools to successfully carry out modern choices and requirements. Our culture offers no mandatory education on relationship skills, sexuality, child development, parenting, or family life, because the story continues: With that one right person, life is a happy ending. Unfortunately, the story is a magical fairy tale. Love is not all we need for successful relationships.

Through research and clinical experience, I learned that the most common complaint brought to therapists and several types of physicians is the low and no-sex relationship. The waning of desire and sexual activity is common for individuals and for committed couples and has a myriad of causes (Orion, 2011). This is not dysfunction—this is the norm. Modern consensual monogamy is still hinged on a factor of desire and sexual activity. This aspect of relationships is unreliable, and automatic genuine sexual chemistry cannot be manufactured.

Monogamy, according to Merriam-Webster dictionary is:

(1)The practice or state of being married to one person at a time.

(2)The practice or state of having a sexual relationship with only one partner.

(3)Zoology: The habit of having only one mate at a time.

The term monogamy is used by virtually everyone and is socially and legally considered the mainstream acceptable form of relationship upon which our complex culture is founded. Monogamy is one of the Fundamental American Family Values, yet several issues complicate clear understanding of what monogamy actually is.

Advances in various sciences present the current knowledge about monogamy:

• Monogamy is not global but is a socialized cultural norm.

• Monogamy is proclaimed to be, but is not the actual practiced cultural norm.

• Monogamy is not instinctive for humans.

• Monogamy is not defined the same by everyone.

• Monogamy is not the only workable, loving choice.

Monogamy Is Not Global but Is a Socialized Cultural Norm

From womb to adulthood, our experience of being conceived, born, and brought up in our family of origin profoundly impacts our sexuality and relationships. Add in the powerful social influences of where and when any person is born and raised, and we may get the full recipe for what creates any individual’s sex and relationship predilections.

Our culture continues to be socially programmed by family, schools, and by media—religious and secular sources alike—that one person for a lifetime is the ideal. The assumption is that this works for others and is the historic successful norm, therefore all couples should know automatically how to make it work. A happy lifetime together, including sexual exclusivity, is the dream. The magical fairy tale.

Many times I’ve heard disgruntled couples say, when their own fairy tale gets holes in it, “My parents stayed together and I want to,” or “I know couples who are still together after twenty or thirty years, isn’t that what’s supposed to happen?” Many are in serious, deep emotional pain, bashing themselves as failures because they can’t make their traditional sexually monogamous relationship work. They blame themselves, not realizing their understandable lack of knowledge and tools, and not realizing they are expecting magic.

Monogamy Is Proclaimed to Be, but Is Not the Actual Practiced Cultural Norm

Mackay (2000) reports statistics that remain throughout western cultures where monogamy is the mainstream style of marriage: in 40–80% of relationships at least one partner cheats at least once. Mackay’s report includes information from the World Health Association: In the year 2000, among sexually active 16–45-year-olds in six nations including America, between 22 and 50% of adults reported being sexually unfaithful (these are just the subjects who admit it). Observation of current culture does not reveal improvement.

The most common relationship in western civilization is now serial monogamy—one monogamous relationship after another. Webster’s dictionary’s definitions of monogamy include the habit of having only one mate, or being married to only one person at a time. According to this standard, many may be monogamous for a lifetime, even though they change partners along the way.

Monogamy Is Not Instinctive for Humans

In virtually every scientific field, humans are revealed to resemble most species in existence, as nonmonogamous by nature. Current sexology posits whether a tendency toward or away from sexual monogamy lies on a continuum. Some people may, by nature, not be suited for, or desirous of, more than one mate. Others may be naturally drawn to multiple sexual partners at any given time, and often to more than one exclusive sexual partner—each for a period of years—during a lifetime.

Sexuality is instinctive. Survival is our strongest instinct and sexual monogamy is rare among all creatures on the planet. According to Buss (2017), only 3% of mammalians have long-term, committed mating, in part because monogamy does not ensure survival (Ferrer, 2007). For example, some birds “mate for life.” They come back to the same partner year after year at mating season. Because of DNA testing, however, we now know that every third to fifth egg is fertilized by a different...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• Part I Definitions and Social Issues
• Part II Issues and Interventions
• Index