Life History and Multi-Partner Mating: A Novel Explanation for Moral Stigma Against Consensual Non-monogamy

Abstract

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.

Regulatory Focus and Perceived Safety with Casual Partners: Implications for Perceived Risk and Casual Sex Intentions During the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…For example, life history theory (Del Giudice et al, 2015) postulates that people with a slower life historymuch like prevention focused people-are oriented toward long term planning and avoid taking risks, whereas those with a faster life history-much like promotion focused peopleare oriented toward immediate gratification and make riskier decisions. Research has shown that people with slower (vs. faster) life history report more short-term and less long-term mating orientations, more germ aversion (but less perceived infectability), and take less health and security risks (Mogilski et al, 2020). In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, people with a slower (vs. faster) life history also reported more positive attitudes towards precautious behaviors during the pandemic (e.g., wearing a mask in public), and were more willing to donate their plasma to help others with COVID-19 (Corpuz et al, 2020).…”

Spatial and Social Behavior of Single and Coupled Individuals of Both Sexes during COVID-19 Lockdown Regime in Russia

“…Individual response to a pathogen stress could be also seen through the lens of a life history theory framework (LH), which describes variation in the allocation of finite bioenergetic resources among somatic, mating and parental tasks. Psychological studies evident that the fast life history strategy has been linked to poorer health outcomes and more risker behavior [79]. More active sexual and spatial activities in some males could advocate for the presence of fast LH traits.…”

Differences in Motivation to Engage in Sexual Activity Between People in Monogamous and Non-monogamous Committed Relationships

“…While some non-monogamous respondents may have several concurrent sexual partners, this study focused only on two partners if the respondent indicated being non-monogamous. Only half of multi-partner participants of the study by Mogilski et al (2020) reported having two partners, while one quarter had three concurrent partners and one fifth—four or more partners). Studying reasons to engage in sexual activity with each of respondent’s sexual partners (if more than two) may give us a better understanding of reasons to engage in sexual activity with the whole cohort of partners.…”