Last April, Carrie Ichikawa Jenkins and Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa got married; last July, they published a co-authored piece (in Off Topic) on their experience as a non-monogamous married couple. They kindly agreed to be interviewed for NewAPPS on the concept of non-monogamous marriages – on the theory and also a bit on the practice.
Monogamy vs. non-monogamy in long-term committed relationships is a complex topic. From a biological point of view, human beings find themselves in a bit of a squeeze. On the one hand, our closest living ancestors, the great apes, are for the most part not in any way monogamous in their mating strategies; but on the other hand, the fact that human babies are born so immature (altriciality) creates evolutionary pressure towards monogamous patterns (across species, there is a correlation between altriciality and monogamy, with e.g. many bird species). This might explain why we have a tendency towards long term monogamous relationships and at the same time a tendency towards variation of sexual partners. In a sense, we are both chimpanzees and swans, hence the challenge. But it is not necessarily a no-win situation, as Carrie and Jonathan suggest here.
______________________________________________________________________
CATARINA: Some time ago I was reading an article about Dan Savage, where he said the following: historically, non-monogamy was tolerated in men but not in women. With better gender equality inside marriages in the 20th century, the double standards had to go, but instead of extending to women the privileges that had been reserved to men, what happened was rather that the standards traditionally reserved for women were then applied to men. (According to Savage, this was a disaster for marriage!) How do you see the connection between open relationships and gender equality? Are open relationships about gender equality in some sense or another?
CARRIE: I don’t know that it’s about gender equality, at least at the individual level. I am into gender equality and I think that, like everything else (and particularly everything to do with relationships), decisions about monogamy and non-monogamy should be made in a way that’s sensitive to that issue. But speaking personally, my decision to be in an open relationship was made primarily on the basis of considerations like enjoying the idea of myself and my partner dating more than one person. Dan Savage, I guess, is making a wider point about how certain large-scale cultural and social changes have interacted with changes in gender equality. I’m nowhere near good enough at history or sociology to say whether he’s right about these changes, or whether (or how easily) things could have gone the other way. For what it’s worth, I sort of suspect there’s something to the gist of the claims you attribute to him above, though of course monogamy isn’t disastrous for all marriages, non-monogamy wasn’t denied to all women (or granted to all men) before the 20th century, etc.
One thing worth considering in this context is that equality is an annoyingly tricksy concept to apply here (as, indeed, in most situations). Some couples choose to be non-monogamous in asymmetric ways (e.g. with exactly one partner monogamous, or with different sets of freedoms agreed for each partner). Depending on the personalities, wishes and circumstances involved, that might be the best thing, and even the most equal thing, to do: if you are aiming for equality of preference-satisfaction as opposed to equality of sexual restriction, for example. It’s also relevant that the world treats different genders differently, and this is very noticeable with respect to non-monogamy. For example, it is often much easier for partnered non-monogamous women to get a date outside their primary relationship than for partnered non-monogamous men to do the same thing. On the other hand, women are often a lot more likely to be thought of badly for having more than one sexual partner at a time. What’s the best way to strive for gender equality under such circumstances? I’m really not sure.
JONATHAN: I agree with Carrie; I don’t see any straightforward sense in which decisions about monogamy and non-monogamy are closely connected to questions about gender equality. Savage is right, of course, that the monogamous ideal has historically been enforced in a gender-biased way. But as Carrie says, there are still double-standards in play that affect non-monogamous people. And I certainly wouldn’t say there’s anything anti-feminist or unbalanced about monogamy.
Choices in romantic relationships are deeply personal things; I think couples (or individuals, or larger groups) should decide what is best for themselves, with sensitivity to the needs and concerns of all relevant parties. Broader sociological questions about gender equality belong in a different sphere. If two men fall in love and decide to get married, they too will have a decision to make about what kinds of exclusivity they are promising to one another; in their case, it’s clearly not a gender-equality issue. But they’re facing exactly the same choice we did.
CATARINA: One of the themes in discussions on the concept of polyamory is the idea that it must be seen as responsible non-monogamy, i.e. that it must be practiced with caution so as to avoid emotional damage not only to the two people involved but also to others. So there are many interesting but also challenging ethical implications. How do you see these implications?
CARRIE: Terminology is also complicated here; ‘polyamory’ (for any readers who aren’t familiar with the word) is used to refer to the policy and/or practice of openness to multiple intimate loving relationships. It’s a bit different from the kind of non-monogamy we’re exploring (at least, at the moment). We aren’t looking for romantic love outside our marriage; extra-marital dating and friends-with-benefits relationships are more our thing. So I’m no expert on polyamory in particular, but I absolutely agree that non-monogamy of whatever stripe needs be undertaken respectfully and considerately. And that can be really hard, if only because it’s not what most people do and so we don’t have years of advice, examples and past screw-ups to learn from.
There are emotional risks (jealousy being the most obvious) that we work hard to understand and avoid. But honesty solves and avoids the majority of problems, in my experience. I don’t pretend to offer anything I’m not in a position to offer to my extra-marital partners, Jonathan’s allowed to read any of my communications with other partners at any time (and vice versa), and we talk – as much as we need to – about our situation and feelings.
When I really think about it, I feel like there’s nothing particularly special about non-monogamous relationships when it comes to the potential to cause harm. Jealousy occurs in monogamous relationships too (indeed, for some people it can be worse in them), and the potential risk to third parties isn’t unique to non-monogamy either: people outside of a monogamous relationship can get hurt if e.g. they are led to believe one partner is interested in them, or if they get involved in an illicit extra-relationship liaison, or whatever. Monogamous relationships, like non-monogamous ones (and life generally) are just the sort of thing you can do well or badly.
JONATHAN: Yes, non-monogamy ought to be performed responsibly. But the same goes for pretty much all of life. For some of these purposes, I think it’s helpful to think of non-monogamous partnerships as similar to being single, rather than being in a monogamous couple. When I was in grad school, I dated. Dating came in many different forms—sometimes it was very casual, and sometimes it involved more emotional connection. Sometimes I’d see someone for only a short period of time; other times, it would persist longer. Sometimes I was dating other women at the same time; other times I’d only be seeing one person—of these, sometimes we agreed that we were being monogamous, and sometimes I just wasn’t seeing anybody else. Being single and dating comes in many diverse forms, and since you’re getting involved with other people, and sex brings out strong emotions, there is potential to hurt partners in myriad ways. It requires some experience and emotional sensitivity to learn how to date responsibly.
This is all totally commonplace knowledge among adults, because most of us have lived through some of these mistakes and learned from them, and all of us have lots of friends who have done so. Being in a non-monogamous partnership is really, with respect to the importance of treating relevant parties sensitively and responsibly, no different. I think that the ethical questions in the latter case are more salient and intimidating to some people, just because they haven’t practiced with them and spent time thinking about them as much. Carrie is right that one of the most important things is to communicate your situation, feelings, and intentions clearly and honestly. That’s probably my first piece of advice to single people who want to date responsibly, too.
CATARINA: The reason why I brought this up is that those who are not familiar with these concepts and practices often think that non-monogamy is an ‘anything goes’ kind of arrangement, whereas in fact it is in many senses more ‘ethical’ in that it requires more negotiation and consensus than ‘default’ arrangements, which are usually adopted unreflectively. For something else... (Part II here)
Recent Comments