Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Moving Past the Rose-Tinted Lens of Monogamy: Onward with Critical Self-Examination and (Sexually) Healthy Science

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aguilar, J. (2013). Situational sexual behaviors: The ideological work of moving toward polyamory in communal living groups. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 42(1), 104–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentzen, A.-S., & Træen, B. (2014). Swinging in Norway in the context of sexual health. Sexuality and Culture, 18(1), 132–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowleg, L. (2008). When Black + lesbian + woman ≠ Black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 312–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewster, M. E., Soderstrom, B., Esposito, J., Breslow, A., Sawyer, J., Geiger, E., & Foster, A. (2017). A content analysis of scholarship on consensual nonmonogamies: Methodological roadmaps, current themes, and directions for future research. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 6(1), 32–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. E. (1991). Human universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64(3), 170–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, E. R., & Sabik, N. J. (2009). Repairing a broken mirror: Intersectional approaches to diverse women’s perceptions of beauty and bodies. In M. T. Berger & K. Guidroz (Eds.), The intersectional approach: Transforming the academy through race, class, and gender (pp. 173–192). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conley, T. D., Matsick, J., Moors, A. C., & Ziegler, A. (2017). The Investigation of consensually non-monogamous relationships: Theories, methods and new directions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(2), 205–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, T. D., Matsick, J. L., Moors, A. C., Ziegler, A., & Rubin, J. D. (2015a). Re-examining the effectiveness of monogamy as an STI-preventive strategy. Preventive Medicine, 78, 23–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, T. D., & Moors, A. C. (2014). More oxygen please!: How polyamorous relationship strategies might oxygenate marriage. Psychological Inquiry, 25(1), 56–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Ziegler, A. (2013a). The fewer the merrier: Assessing stigma surrounding non-normative romantic relationships. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Ziegler, A. (2015b). Sexuality-related risks are judged more harshly than comparable health risks. International Journal of Sexual Health, 27(4), 508–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conley, T. D., Ziegler, A., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., & Valentine, B. (2013b). A critical examination of popular assumptions about the benefits and outcomes of monogamous relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 124–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copen, C. E., Daniels, K., Vespa, J., & Mosher, W. D. (2012). First marriages in the United States: Data from the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth; No. 49. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, M. V. (2016). Why people defend relationship ideology. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33(3), 348–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407515613164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, E. J., Hui, C. M., Carswell, K. L., & Larson, G. M. (2014). The suffocation of marriage: Climbing Mount Maslow without enough oxygen. Psychological Inquiry, 25(1), 1–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, K. (2013). Plays well in groups: A journey through the world of group sex. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, K. (2018). Rethinking risk, culture, and intervention in collective sex environments. Archives of Sexual Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1153-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gama, A., Abecasis, A., Pingarilho, M., Mendão, L., Martins, M. O., Barros, H., & Dias, S. (2017). Cruising venues as a context for HIV risky behavior among men who have sex with men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(4), 1061–1068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grudzen, C. R., & Kerndt, P. R. (2007). The adult film industry: Time to regulate? PLoS Medicine, 4(6), e126. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040126.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haupert, M. L., Gesselman, A. N., Moors, A. C., Fisher, H. E., & Garcia, J. R. (2017a). Prevalence of experiences with consensual nonmonogamous relationships: Findings from two national samples of single Americans. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 43(5), 424–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haupert, M. L., Moors, A. C., Gesselman, A. N., & Garcia, J. R. (2017b). Estimates and correlates of engagement in consensually non-monogamous relationships. Current Sexual Health Reports, 9(3), 155–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moors, A. C. (2017). Has the American public’s interest in information related to relationships beyond “the couple” increased over time? Journal of Sex Research, 54(6), 677–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moors, A. C., Matsick, J., & Schechinger, H. (2017). Unique and shared relationship benefits of consensually non-monogamous and monogamous relationships: A review and insights for moving forward. European Psychologist, 22(1), 55–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., Ziegler, A., Rubin, J., & Conley, T. D. (2013). Stigma toward individuals engaged in consensual non-monogamy: Robust and worthy of additional research. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), 52–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newport, F., Jones, J. M., Saad, L., & Carroll, J. (2006). Americans and their pets. Gallup. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/25969/americans-their-pets.aspx.

  • Perel, E. (2006). Mating in captivity: Reconciling the erotic + the domestic. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, G., Grov, C., & Mustanski, B. (2015). Engagement in group sex among geosocial networking mobile application-using men who have sex with men. Sexual Health, 12(6), 495–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubel, A. N., & Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Consensual nonmonogamy: Psychological well-being and relationship quality correlates. Journal of Sex Research, 52(9), 961–982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scoats, R., Joseph, L. J., & Anderson, E. (2018). ‘I don’t mind watching him cum’: Heterosexual men, threesomes, and the erosion of the one-time rule of homosexuality. Sexualities, 21(1–2), 30–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sizemore, K. M., & Olmstead, S. B. (2017). Willingness of emerging adults to engage in consensual non-monogamy: A mixed-methods analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1075-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, A. J. (1998). Doing personality research: How can feminist theories help? In B. McVicker Clinchy & J. K. Norem (Eds.), The gender and psychology reader (pp. 54–68). New York: New York University Press.

  • Warner, L. (2008). A best practices guide to intersectional approaches in psychological research. Sex Roles, 59(5), 454–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wosick-Correa, K. (2010). Agreements, rules and agentic fidelity in polyamorous relationships. Psychology & Sexuality, 1(1), 44–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Social Science Research and Evaluation Program, Purdue University, Neil Armstrong Hall of Engineering, 701 W. Stadium Ave, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Amy C. Moors

  2. The Kinsey Institute, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Amy C. Moors

Authors
  1. Amy C. Moors
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy C. Moors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moors, A.C. Moving Past the Rose-Tinted Lens of Monogamy: Onward with Critical Self-Examination and (Sexually) Healthy Science. Arch Sex Behav 48, 57–61 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1215-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1215-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation