Life history theory (LHT) predicts that individuals vary in their sexual, reproductive, parental, familial, and social behavior according to the physical and social challenges imposed upon them throughout development. LHT provides a framework for understanding why non-monogamy may be the target of significant moral condemnation: individuals who habitually form multiple romantic or sexual partnerships may pursue riskier, more competitive interpersonal strategies that strain social cooperation. We compared several indices of life history (i.e., the Mini-K, the High-K Strategy Scale, pubertal timing, sociosexuality, disease avoidance, and risk-taking) between individuals practicing monogamous and consensually non-monogamous (CNM) romantic relationships. Across several measures, CNM individuals reported a faster life history strategy than monogamous individuals, and women in CNM relationships reported earlier pubertal development. CNM individuals also reported more social and ethical risk-taking, less aversion to germs, and greater interest in shortterm mating (and less interest in long-term mating) than monogamous individuals. From these data, we discuss a model to explain how moral stigma toward non-monogamy evolved and how these attitudes may be mismatched to the modern environment. Specifically, we argue that the culture of sexual ethics that pervades contemporary CNM communities (e.g., polyamory, swinging) may attenuate risky interpersonal behaviors (e.g., violent intrasexual competition, retributive jealousy, partner/child abandonment, disease transmission) that are relatively more common among those who pursue multi-partner mating.
Background Previous research has found differences in sexual motives and, separately, sexual satisfaction in consensually non-monogamous (CNM) and monogamous individuals and that these constructs are related to relationship outcomes (eg, relationship quality). Aims The present study sought to refine and expand on previous research by (i) using a more common, validated measure of sexual motives, (ii) measuring sexual satisfaction with multiple partners within CNM relationships, and (iii) examining how sexual motives are related to sexual satisfaction in CNM relationships. Methods Participants were recruited from a university and using online forums that CNM individuals frequently use (eg, reddit, Facebook). Individuals recruited included those in non-exclusive relationships with one partner (“non-exclusive single-partner;” n = 40), those in non-exclusive relationships with more than one partner (“non-exclusive multipartner;” n = 87), and monogamous individuals (n = 322). Data were analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance and hierarchical multiple regressions. Outcomes The main outcome measures of this study are scores on the Why Humans Have Sex Scale and the New Scale for Sexual Satisfaction. Results Non-exclusive multipartner participants were more motivated to have sex for physical motivations compared with monogamous participants. Although there were no significant differences in sexual satisfaction when comparing monogamous with non-exclusive multipartner participant's secondary and primary partners, unique patterns of sexual motivations were associated with sexual satisfaction based on relationship configuration. Clinical Translation Understanding the unique sexual motives associated with sexual satisfaction in various relationship configurations may help improve clinical approaches to couples counseling for both CNM and non-CNM populations. Strengths and Limitations Data were collected from CNM participants in a variety of relationship configurations and provide analyses comparing primary and secondary partners. However, these results are limited by a small sample of CNM participants who were intentionally recruited from self-identified CNM e-forums. Conclusions These findings add further understanding to the unique traits that characterize CNM individuals and the underlying motivational framework that may encourage individuals to initiate and maintain CNM relationships.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.