A qualitative examination of consideration and practice of consensual nonmonogamy among sexual and gender minority couples.

Abstract

Transgender (trans) individuals and their partners demonstrate significant diversity in terms of sexuality and approaches to romantic relationships. Over 3/4 (77%) of trans individuals identify as sexual minorities, but little is known about how they negotiate sexual and gender identities within a relationship. Additionally, findings have indicated that trans individuals and their partners utilize nonmonogamous relationship structures, but research focused on how these relationships develop and the function of consensual nonmonogamy (CNM) is limited. The goal of this study was to address these gaps through an exploration of CNM in a sample of trans individuals and their partners who participated in a larger study about sex, sexuality, and sexual practice. The subsample consisted of 12 individuals (6 couples) who discussed CNM as part of their broader discussion of relationships and sexual practice. Four individuals (2 couples) were currently engaged in relationships with extradyadic partners. In terms of sexual identity, 67% of participants (n ϭ 8) identified as bisexual-queer-pansexual. A majority of participants identified as transgender (67%; n ϭ 8), and participants' ages ranged from 23 to 39 (M ϭ 30.2, SD ϭ 5.5). Transcripts were analyzed using Charmaz's (2014) approach to grounded theory. Themes identified during analysis highlight factors that facilitate and hinder the development of CNM relationships and individual and relationship factors that impact CNM relationships among trans individuals and their partners. Public Significance StatementThis study advances the idea that consensual nonmonogamy may be an important component of some transgender individuals' and their partners' lives. Results suggest that specific factors related to transgender identity, such as openness to new experiences or adjustment related to defying social norms, may create a unique process that allows for additional possibilities for relationships.

Motivations for Engaging in Consensually Non-Monogamous Relationships

“…Current literature underscores the importance of variety (both sexual and non-sexual) for people engaged in CNM (Jenks, 1998;Moors et al, 2017a;Rossman, Sinnard, & Budge 2019). A review of the early swinging literature noted that a primary reason for participating in swinging included sexual variety (26% of participants), followed by pleasure/excitement (19%; Jenks, 1998).…”

“…A review of the early swinging literature noted that a primary reason for participating in swinging included sexual variety (26% of participants), followed by pleasure/excitement (19%; Jenks, 1998). Qualitative research with sexual and gender minority couples also highlighted the importance of sexual exploration and sexual fantasy among people's reasons for engaging in or considering CNM (Rossman et al, 2019). Participants wanted to experience types of sex that differed from what they were experiencing in their current partnership.…”

Perceived boundary negotiations with former partners among queer stepfamilies.

“…Interview questions relevant to the present analysis included the following family interview questions: “Can you tell me your story about how you all became a family?” and “Do you think there is anything that should be [understood about] what is specific to when a [step]couple is gay or lesbian?” Questions used from the couple interview included “Were there any other struggles in the first few years [of being a family] that it took some time to work out?” and those from the child interview included “Is there any additional information that you want to give that you maybe you didn’t talk about earlier because your parents were here?” Incorporating data from both dyads (Rossman, Sinnard, & Budge, 2019) and children (Schimmel-Bristow et al, 2018) helped to develop a more thorough understanding of a family as a unit, particularly when using family systems theory and allowed for some data triangulation across interview types and family members.…”

“…Specifically, we used constructivist grounded theory, which examines how processes occur within individuals’ contexts and are uniquely interpreted by those who experience them (Charmaz, 2006). Grounded theory is useful in examining queer families, as it allows for theorizing about a specific process that is drawn directly from the experiences of the participants (Goldberg & Allen, 2013; Rossman et al, 2019), who have been historically overlooked or marginalized in research. The first author immersed herself in the data, reading through each interview (i.e., stepfamily, couple, child) separately and clustered by family, examining how the data were situated in current literature on stepfamily processes.…”

“…and those from the child interview included "Is there any additional information that you want to give that you maybe you didn't talk about earlier because your parents were here?" Incorporating data from both dyads (Rossman, Sinnard, & Budge, 2019) and children (Schimmel-Bristow et al, 2018) helped to develop a more thorough understanding of a family as a unit, particularly when using family systems theory and allowed for some data triangulation across interview types and family members.…”