Mononormativity, Polypride, and the “Mono–Poly Wars”

Abstract

Both in everyday life and scholarly discourse, monogamists and polyamorists tend to unfavorably portray one another as somehow flawed, misguided, or, in a word, “inferior.” This article documents and critically examines two pairs of interlocked psychosocial attitudes—monopride/polyphobia and polypride/monophobia—mediating this predicament of mutual competition in the context of Western mononormative culture. The ideological nature of these “mono–poly wars” is demonstrated through a brief review of empirical literature on the psychological health and relationship quality of monogamous and polyamorous individuals and couples. The article concludes by outlining a critical pluralist approach that eschews universalizing hierarchies between monogamy and polyamory, and provides tools for making qualitative distinctions within and among relational styles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term polyamory is a hybrid word etymologically meaning “many loves.” Also known as responsible nonmonogamy (e.g., Anapol 1997; Klesse 2006), polyamory is both a philosophy of love and “a relationship orientation that assumes that it is possible to love many people and to maintain multiple intimate and sexual relationships” (Barker 2005, p. 75; cf. Sheff 2006). Polyamory has also been described as a form of nonmonogamy grounded on the belief in “people’s capacity to share and multiply their love in honest and consensual ways” (Anderlini-D’Onofrio 2004, p. 165). As discussed below, polyamory is usually contrasted to not only monogamy and polygamy, but also swinging, casual sex, and promiscuity.

  2. 2.

    Although this paper cannot address relational malleability and gender differences, research shows that not only can males and females undergo important changes in their sexual and relational orientations (for discussions, see Conley et al. 2012c; Ferrer, in press), but also that individual women show greater sexual plasticity than men over time arguably due to a variety of evolutionary and sociocultural forces (Baumeister 2000).

  3. 3.

    In what follows, I differentiate between monogamists/polyamorists (who ideologically hold their preferred relational style as natural, superior, or advantageous) and monogamous/polyamorous (who do not).

  4. 4.

    As Rambukkana (2015) argued, the culturally prevalent, essentializing portrayal of polygamy as patriarchal polygyny perpetuates mononormative values. Interestingly, both monogamous and polyamorous individuals tend to position themselves as superior to polygamous people (e.g., Klesse 2006; Ritchie 2010).

  5. 5.

    Nonmonogamy is a more encompassing term than polyamory. Whereas the former includes any type of nonmonogamous relationship—including open marriage, swinging, and promiscuity—the latter is normally used to refer to the consensual, long-term maintenance of more than one romantic, sexual, and/or emotional bond (see Barker and Langdridge 2010a, b; Haritaworn et al. 2006; Klesse 2006; Sheff 2006). Although this essay mostly focuses on polyamory, much of what is said about the “mono–poly wars” may well apply to other nonmonogamies.

  6. 6.

    Although virtually all poly activists and scholars critique compulsory monogamy, some neither reject monogamy per se nor hold polyamory as categorically superior (e.g., Anapol 1997, 2010; Barker 2012; Taormino 2008; Veaux and Rickert 2014).

  7. 7.

    The following account is informed by almost three decades of personal exchanges in Spain and the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as many European (e.g., England, Germany, Italy), Asian (e.g., Japan, India, Indonesia), and Central and South American countries (e.g., Mexico, Peru, Argentina). Although aspects of the following discussion might apply to other cultures, I limit its validity claims to modern Western countries (e.g., European nations, Canada, the United States).

  8. 8.

    Challenging the standard evolutionary narrative of an ancestral pair-bonding culture and archaically seated sexual jealousy, Ryan and Jethá (2010) argued for a far more sexually promiscuous human pre-historic past and a link between the origins of patriarchy and the emergence of agriculture about ten thousand years ago; for critiques of this proposal, see Ellsworth (2011) and Saxon (2011). Although the emergence of agriculture (and thus of human settlements and private property) very likely increased men’s concern for paternity and thus sexual possessiveness (e.g., Stearns 2009), the exact (pre-)historical origins of sexual jealousy are probably manifold and far from clear-cut; after all, many hunter-gatherer cultures practice marriage (Walker et al. 2011) and sexual jealousy exists even in cultures practicing shared paternity (Beckerman and Valentine 2002).

  9. 9.

    For a witty—and deliberately polemical—defense of adultery in the context of modern Western mononormative culture, see Kipnis (2003).

  10. 10.

    As a student of religion, I have always been fascinated by the parallels between the “mono–poly wars” and the many-centuries-long conflict between monotheism and polytheism (e.g., Kirsch 2004; Paper 2005), for example, regarding the superiority of the One over the Many, questions around the exclusivity of loving devotion, God’s expressed jealousy toward other Gods, and so forth. The religious underpinnings of the “mono–poly wars” are complex and surely deserve an extended discussion; for some directions, see Rycenga (1995), Anderlini-D’Onofrio (2004), Goss (2004), Willey (2006), and Kolesar (2010).

References

  1. Amidon, E., Kumar, V. K., & Treadwell, T. (1983). Measurement of intimacy attitudes: The Intimacy Attitude Scale—Revised. Journal of Personality Assessment, 47, 635–639.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anapol, D. (1997). Polyamory: The new love without limits. Secrets of sustainable intimate relationships. San Rafael, CA: IntiNet Resource Center.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anapol, D. (2004). A glimpse of harmony. In S. Anderlini-D’Onofrio (Ed.), Plural loves: Designs for bi and poly living (pp. 109–119). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anapol, D. (2010). Polyamory in the 21st century: Love and intimacy with multiple partners. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Anderlini-D’Onofrio, S. (2004). Plural loves: By and poly utopias for a new millennium. In S. Anderlini-D’Onofrio (Ed.), Plural loves: Designs for by and poly living (pp. 1–6). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Anderlini-D’Onofrio, S. (2010). Gaia and the new politics of love. Notes for a poly planet. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Anderson, E. (2012). The monogamy gap: Men, love, and the reality of cheating. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ani, M. (1994). Yurugu: An Afrocentric critique of European thought and behavior. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Apt, C., & Hurlbert, D. F. (1994). The sexual attitudes, behavior, and relationships of women with histrionic personality disorder. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 20, 125–133.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ashkam, J. (1984). Identity and stability in marriage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Barash, D. P., & Lipton, J. E. (2009). Strange bedfellows: The surprising connection between sex, evolution, and monogamy. New York, NY: Bellevue Literary Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Barker, M. (2005). This is my partner, and this is my. partner’s partner: Constructing a polyamorous identity in a monogamous world. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18(1), 75–88.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barker, M.-J. (2012). Rewriting the rules: An integrative guide to love, sex and relationships. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Barker, M., & Langdridge, D. (Eds.). (2010a). Understanding non-monogamies. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Barker, M., & Langdridge, D. (2010b). Whatever happened to non-monogamies? Critical reflections on recent research and practice. Sexualities, 13(6), 748–772.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Gender differences in erotic plasticity: The female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 347–374.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Beckerman, S., & Valentine, P. (Eds.). (2002). Cultures of multiple fathers: The theory and practice of partible paternity in lowland South America. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Benhabib, S. (2002). The claims of culture: Equality and diversity in the global era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Benson, P. J. (2008). The polyamory handbook. Bloomington, IN: Author House.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bergstrand, C. R., & Sinski, J. B. (2010). Swinging in America: Love, sex, and marriage in the 21st century. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Betzig, L. L. (1986). Despotism and differential reproduction: A Darwinian view of history. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Birnbaum, G. E., Reis, H. T., Mikulincer, M., Gillath, O., & Orpaz, A. (2006). When sex is more than sex: Attachment orientations, sexual experience, and relationship quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 929–943.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Brandon, M. (2010). Monogamy: The untold story. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Brubaker, R. (2016). Trans: Gender and race in an age of unsettled identities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Brunning, L. (2016). The distinctiveness of polyamory. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 33(3), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Buss, D. M. (2000a). Desires in human mating. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 907(1), 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Buss, D. (2000b). The dangerous passion: Why jealousy is as necessary as love or sex. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 193–221.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Chapais, B. (2010). The deep structure of human society: primate origins and evolution. In P. M. Kappeler & J. B. Silk (Eds.), Mind the gap: Tracing the origins of human universals (pp. 19–51). Heidelberg,: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Chapais, B. (2013). Monogamy, strongly bounded groups, and the evolution of human social structure. Evolutionary Anthropology, 22(2), 52–65.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Charny, I. W. (1992). Existential/dialectical marital therapy: Breaking the secret code of marital therapy. New York, NY: Brunner Mazel.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Clark, G. A. (1998). Human monogamy. Science, 282, 1047–1048.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Conley, T. D., & Moors, A. C. (2014). More oxygen please! How polyamorous relationship strategies may oxygenate marriage. Psychological Inquiry, 25, 56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Ziegler, A. (2012a). The fewer the merrier? Assessing stigma surrounding consensually non-monogamous romantic relationships. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Ziegler, A., & Karathanasis, C. (2012b). Unfaithful individuals are less likely to practice safer sex than openly non-monogamous individuals. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 9(6), 1559–1565.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Conley, T. D., Ziegler, A., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Valentine, B. A. (2012c). A critical examination of popular assumptions about the benefits and outcomes of monogamous relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 124–141.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Deri, J. (2015). Love’s refraction: Jealousy and compersión in queer women’s polyamorous relationships. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Derrida, J. (1981). Positions (trans.: A. Bass). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

  40. Duncombe, J., Harrison, K., Allen, G., & Marsden, D. (Eds.). (2004). The state of affairs: Explorations in infidelity and commitment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Easton, D., & Liszt, C. (1998). The ethical slut: A guide to infinite sexual possibilities. San Francisco, CA: Greenery Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ellsworth, R. M. (2011). The human that never evolved: A review of Christopher Ryan and Caclida Jethá, Sex and dawn: How we mate, how we stray, and what it means for modern sexuality. Evolutionary Psychology, 9(3), 325–335.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Emens, E. (2004). Monogamy’s law: Compulsory monogamy and polyamorous existence. New York University Review of Law and Social Change, 29(2), 277–376.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Fay, B. (1987). Critical social science: Liberation and its limits. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Faye, G. (2014). Sex and deviance. London: Arktos Media Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ferrer, J. N. (2002). Revisioning transpersonal theory: A participatory vision of human spirituality. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ferrer, J. N. (2007). Monogamy, polyamory, and beyond. Tikkun: Culture, Spirituality, Politics, 22(1), 37–43, 60–62.

  48. Ferrer, J. N. (2017a). Beyond the non/monogamy system: Fluidity, hybridity, and transcendence in intimate relationships. Psychology and Sexuality. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2017.1400459.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ferrer, J. N. (2017b). Participation and the mystery: Transpersonal essays on psychology, education, and the mystery. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ferrer, J. N. (in press). From romantic jealousy to sympathetic joy: Monogamy, polyamory, and beyond. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies.

  51. Fisher, H. (1992). Anatomy of love: A natural history of mating, marriage, and why we stray. New York, NY: Ballantine.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Franceschi, G. J. (2006). Women maintaining a consensually non-monogamous relationship: A qualitative investigation (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3199398).

  53. Garber, M. (1992). Vested interests: Cross-dressing and cultural anxiety. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Geuss, R. (1981). The idea of a critical theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt school. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love, and eroticism in modern societies. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Goss, R. E. (2004). Proleptic sexual love: God’s promiscuity reflected in Christian polyamory. Theology and Sexuality, 11(1), 52–63.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Grunt-Mejer, K., & Campbell, C. (2016). Around consensual nonmonogamies: Assessing attitudes toward nonexclusive relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 53(1), 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Halpern, E. L. (1999). If love is so wonderful, what’s so scary about MORE? Journal of Lesbian Studies, 3(1/2), 157–164.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Haritaworn, J., Lin, C. J., & Klesse, C. (2006). Poly/logue: A critical introduction to polyamory. Sexualities, 9(5), 515–529.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Heaphy, B., Donovan, C., & Weeks, J. (2004). A different affair? Openness and nonmonogamy in same sex relationships. In J. Duncombe, K. Harrison, G. Allen, & D. Marsden (Eds.), The state of affairs: Explorations in infidelity and commitment (pp. 167–186). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Heinlin, K., & Heinlin, R. (2004). The sex and love handbook: Polyamory! Bisexuality! Swingers! Spirituality! (and even) monogamy! A Practical optimistic relationship guide. San Francisco, CA: Do Things Records & Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Herlihy, D. (1995). Biology and human history: The triumph of monogamy. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 24, 571–583.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Hite, S. (1991). The Hite report on love, passion, and emotional violence. London: Optima.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Ho, P. S. Y. (2006). The (charmed) circle game: Reflections on sexual hierarchy through multiple sexual relationships. Sexualities, 9(5), 547–564.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Hymer, S. M., & Rubin, A. M. (1982). Alternative lifestyle clients: Therapists’ attitudes and clinical experiences. Small Group Research, 13, 532–541.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Jackson, S., & Scott, S. (2004). The personal is still political: Heterosexuality, feminism, and monogamy. Feminism and Psychology, 14(1), 151–157.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Jamieson, L. (1998). Intimacy. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Jenkins, C. S. I. (2015). Modal monogamy. Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 2(8), 175–194.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kanazawa, S., & Still, M. C. (1999). Why monogamy? Social Forces, 78, 25–50.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Kane, P. (2010). The monogamy challenge: Creating and keeping intimacy. Redmond, WA: Relationship Transformations Press.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Kipnis, L. (2003). Against love: A polemic. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Kirsch, J. (2004). God against the Gods: The history of the war between monotheism and polytheism. New York, NY: Viking Compass.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Klesse, C. (2006). Polyamory and its ‘others’: Contesting the terms of non-monogamy. Sexualities, 9(5), 565–583.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Klesse, C. (2014). Polyamory: Intimate practice, identity, or sexual orientation? Sexualities, 17(1/2), 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Kolesar, A. E. A. (2010). Spiritual identities of multiply partnered people (Doctoral dissertation: Institute of Transpersonal Psychology).

  76. Kurdek, L. A. (1988). Relationship quality of gay and lesbian cohabitating couples. Journal of Homosexuality, 15, 93–118.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Kurdek, L. A., & Schmitt, J. P. (1986). Relationship quality of gay men in closed or open relationships. Journal of Homosexuality, 12(2), 85–99.

    Google Scholar 

  78. LaSala, M. C. (2004). Monogamy of the heart: Extradyadic sex and gay male couples. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 17(3), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Lehmiller, J. J. (2015). A comparison of sexual health history and practices among monogamous and consensually nonmonogamous sexual partners. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12(10), 2022–2028.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Loevinger, J. (1976). Ego development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Loue, S. (2006). Sexual partnering, sexual practices, and health. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Lukas, D., & Clutton-Brock, T. H. (2013). The evolution of social monogamy in mammals. Science, 341, 526–530.

    Google Scholar 

  83. MacDonald, K. B. (1995). The establishment and maintenance of socially imposed monogamy in Western Europe. Politics and the Life Sciences, 14, 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Masters, R. A. (2007). Transformation through intimacy: The journey toward mature monogamy. Ashland, OR: Tehmenos Press.

    Google Scholar 

  85. McGrane, B. (1989). Beyond anthropology: Society and the other. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  86. McKeever, N. (2015). Is the requirement of sexual exclusivity consistent with romantic love? Journal of Applied Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12157.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Miller, L. C., & Fishkin, S. A. (1997). On the dynamics of human bonding and reproductive success: Seeking windows on the adapted-for human–environment interface. In J. A. Simpson & D. T. Kenrich (Eds.), Evolutionary social psychology (pp. 197–235). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Mint, P. (2010). The power mechanisms of jealousy. In M. Barker & D. Langdridge (Eds.), Understanding non-monogamies (pp. 201–206). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Mogilski, J. K., Memering, S. L., Welling, L. L. M., & Shackelford, T. (2017). Monogamy versus consensual non-monogamy: Alternative approaches to pursuing strategically pluralistic mating strategy. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(2), 407–417.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Moors, A. C., Conley, T. D., Edelstein, R. S., & Chopin, W. J. (2015). Attached to monogamy? Avoidance predicts willingness to engage (but not actual engagement) in consensual non-monogamy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32(2), 222–240.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Morell, V. (1998). A new look at monogamy. Science, 281(5385), 1982–1983.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Morrison, T. G., Beaulieu, D., Brockman, M., & Beaglaoich, C. Ó. (2013). A comparison of polyamorous and monoamorous persons: Are there differences in indices of relationship well-being and sociosexuality? Psychology and Sexuality, 4, 75–91.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Noël, M. J. (2006). Progressive polyamory: Considering issues of diversity. Sexualities, 9(5), 602–620.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Opie, C. F. (2013). The evolution of social systems in human and non-human primates (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.581239.

  95. Page, E. H. (2004). Mental health services experiences of bisexual women and bisexual men: An empirical study. Journal of Bisexuality, 4(1/2), 137–160.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Pallotta-Chiarolli, M. (2010). Border sexualities, border families in schools. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Paper, J. (2005). The deities are many: A polytheistic theology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Parsons, J. T., Starks, T. J., Gamarel, K. E., & Grov, C. (2012). Non-monogamy and sexual relationship quality among same-sex male couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 26(5), 669–677.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Peabody, S. A. (1982). Alternative lifestyles to monogamous marriage: Variants of normal behavior in psychotherapy clients. Family Relations, 31(3), 425–434.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Petrella, S. (2007). Ethical sluts and closet polyamorists: Dissident eroticism, abject subjects and the normative cycle in self-help books on free love. In N. Rumens & A. Cervantes-Carson (Eds.), Sexual politics of desire and belonging (pp. 151–171). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Pieper, M., & Bauer, R. (2005). Polyamory and mono-normativity: Results of an empirical study of non-monogamous patterns of intimacy. Unpublished manuscript. Hamburg, Germany: Research Center for Feminist, Gender, and Queer Studies, University of Hamburg.

  102. Rambukkana, N. (2015). Fraught intimacies: Non/monogamy in the public sphere. Vancouver, Canada: The University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Ritchie, A. (2010). Discursive constructions of polyamory in mono-normative media culture. In M. Barker & D. Langdridge (Eds.), Understanding non-monogamies (pp. 47–51). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Robinson, V. (1997). My baby just cares for me: Feminism, heterosexuality, and non-monogamy. Journal of Gender Studies, 6(2), 143–157.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Robinson, M. (2013). Monogamy and polyamory as strategies identities. Journal of Bisexuality, 13, 21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Rosa, B. (1994). Anti-monogamy: A radical challenge to compulsory heterosexuality. In G. Griffin, M. Hester, S. Rai, & S. Roseneil (Eds.), Stirring it: Challenges for feminism (pp. 107–120). London: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Rowan, A. (1995). How to be not monogamous. In K. Lano & C. Perry (Eds.), Breaking the barriers of desire: New approaches to multiple relationships (pp. 13–19). Nottingham: Five Leaves Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Rubel, A. N., & Boagert, A. F. (2014). Consensual non-monogamy: Psychological well-being and relationship quality correlates. Journal of Sex Research, 52(9), 961–982.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Rubin, A. M. (1982). Sexually open versus sexually exclusive marriage: A comparison of dyadic adjustment. Alternative Lifestyles, 5(2), 101–106.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Rubin, A. M., & Adams, J. R. (1986). Outcomes of sexually open marriages. The Journal of Sex Research, 22(3), 311–319.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Ryan, C., & Jethá, C. (2010). Sex at dawn: How we mate, how we stray, and what it means for modern sexuality. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Rycenga, J. (1995). Clearly God intended polemics to the threadbare: Some Christian theological justifications for monogamy and polygyny. In K. Lano & C. Perry (Eds.), Breaking the barriers of desire: New approaches to multiple relationships (pp. 87–98). Nottingham: Five Leaves Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Saxon, L. (2011). Sex at dusk: Lifting the shiny wrapping from Sex at dawn. Lexington, KY: CreateSpace.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Schippers, M. (2016). Beyond monogamy: Polyamory and the future of polyqueer sexualities. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Schmitt, D. E. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbanwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 247–275.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Sheff, E. (2005). Polyamorous women, sexual subjectivity, and power. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 34(3), 251–283.

    Google Scholar 

  117. Sheff, E. (2006). Poly-hegemonic masculinities. Sexualities, 9(5), 621–642.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Sheff, E. (2014). The polyamorists next door: Inside multi-partner relationships and families. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Sheff, E., & Hammers, C. (2011). The privilege of perversities: Race, class, and education among polyamorists and kinksters. Psychology and Sexuality, 2(3), 198–223.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Soble, A. (1987). The unity of romantic love. Philosophy and Theology, 1(4), 374–397.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Solomon, R. C. (2006). About love: Reinventing romance for our times. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Spears, B., & Lowen, L. (2016). Choices: Perspectives of gay men on monogamy, non-monogamy, and marriage. San Bernardino, CA: CreateSpace.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Stacey, J. (2011). Unhitched: Love, marriage, and family values from West Hollywood to Western China. New York, NY: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Stearns, P. N. (2009). Sexuality in world history. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  125. Stelboum, J. P. (2010). Patriarchal monogamy. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 3(1–2), 39–46.

    Google Scholar 

  126. Summers, K. (2005). The evolutionary ecology of despotism. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(1), 106–135.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Swan, D. J., & Thompson, S. C. (2016). Monogamy, the protective fallacy: Sexual versus emotional exclusivity and the implication for sexual health risk. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(1), 64–73.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Taormino, T. (2008). Opening up: A guide to creating and sustaining open relationships. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Tibbetts, L. (2001). Commitment in monogamous and polyamorous relationships. Written for Social Work, 521. Washburn University. Retrieved from http://picucci.net/Star/Relationships/polypaper.html.

  130. Treas, J., & Giesen, D. (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabiting Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 48–60.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Tucker, W. (2014). Marriage and civilization: How monogamy made us human. Washington, DC: Regnery.

    Google Scholar 

  132. van Anders, S., Hamilton, L. D., & Watson, N. V. (2007). Multiple partners are associated with higher testosterone in North American men and women. Hormones and Behavior, 41, 454–459.

    Google Scholar 

  133. Vaughan, P. (2003). The monogamy myth: A personal handbook for recovering from affairs. New York, NY: New Market Press.

    Google Scholar 

  134. Veaux, F., & Rickert, F. (2014). More than two: A practical guide to ethical polyamory. Portland, OR: Thorntree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  135. Walker, R. S., Hill, K. R., Flinn, M. V., & Ellsworth, R. M. (2011). Evolutionary history of hunter-gatherer marriage practices. PLoS ONE, 6(4), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  136. Walum, H., Lichtenstein, P., Pedersen, N. L., Larsson, H., Anckarster, H., Westberg, L., et al. (2012). Variation in the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) is associated with pair-boding and social behavior. Biological Psychiatry, 71(5), 419–426.

    Google Scholar 

  137. Walum, H., Westberg, L., Henningsson, S., Neiderhiser, J. M., Reiss, D., Igl, W., et al. (2008). Genetic variation in the vasopressin receptor 1a gene (AVPRIA) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(37), 14153–14156.

    Google Scholar 

  138. Webb, (2012). Yanantin and Masintin in the Andean world: Complementary dualism in modern Peru. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.

    Google Scholar 

  139. Weitzman, G. (2006). Therapy with clients who are bisexual and polyamorous. Journal of Bisexuality, 6(1/2), 137–164.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Wilkinson, E. (2010). What’s queer about non-monogamy now? In M. Barker & D. Langdridge (Eds.), Understanding non-monogamies (pp. 243–254). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  141. Willey, A. (2006). ‘Christian nations’, ‘polygamic races’ and women’s rights: Toward a genealogy of non/monogamy and whiteness. Sexualities, 9(5), 530–546.

    Google Scholar 

  142. Willey, A. (2015). Constituting compulsory monogamy: Normative femininity and the limits of imagination. Journal of Gender Studies, 24(6), 621–633.

    Google Scholar 

  143. Willey, A. (2016). Undoing monogamy: The politics of science and the possibilities of biology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  144. Witte, J., Jr. (2015). The Western case of monogamy over polygamy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  145. Young, A. (2004). Review of The ethical slut: A guide to infinite sexual possibilities, by D. Easton & C. L. Liszt. Off Our Backs (May/June), 38–39.

  146. Young, L. J., Nilsen, R., Waymire, K. G., MacGregor, G. R., & Insel, T. R. (1999). Increased affiliative response to vasopressin in mice expressing the V1a receptor from a monogamous vole. Nature, 400(6746), 766–768.

    Google Scholar 

  147. Zanin, A. (2013). The problem with polynormativity [blog post]. Retrieved from https://sexgeek.wordpress.com/2013/01/24/theproblemwithpolynormativity.

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge N. Ferrer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights Statement

Being theoretical in nature, the article does not involve research with human participants or animals.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferrer, J.N. Mononormativity, Polypride, and the “Mono–Poly Wars”. Sexuality & Culture 22, 817–836 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-017-9494-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Monogamy
  • Polyamory
  • Nonmonogamy
  • Mononormativity
  • Polyphobia
  • Polypride
  • Critical pluralism