“Monogamy and nonmonogamy, much like homosexuality and heterosexuality, are not opposites or two dichotomous states, but rather a continuum along which people move throughout their lives,” says Shlomtsion Kaufman-Rosenberg, an MSW social worker who specializes in intimate relationships.
“Public discourse around couplehood tends to frame intimacy in binary terms: either monogamy or betrayal, loyalty or breakup, stability or thrill-seeking. But the research I conducted in Israel suggests a far more complex picture, one that seeks to listen not only to what people do, but to what they carry within them, to the gaps between desire, identity and their actual relationship style.”
What does that mean?
“It means that I did not find a clear distinction between ‘monogamous people’ and ‘nonmonogamous people,’ but rather a wide distribution of positions, desires and identities along a continuum. People can locate themselves at different points on that continuum and even move along it over the course of their lives. Monogamy and nonmonogamy are not closed categories, but changing forms of intimate and romantic experience. If they were truly dichotomous categories, we would expect full alignment between lifestyle and desire, but that is not what emerged in my research.”
In a preliminary study conducted in Israel under the supervision of Professor Karni Ginzburg at the Tel Aviv University School of Social Work, titled “Fifty Shades of Choice: Desire, Self-Perception, Sexual Subjectivity and Conformity as Shapers of Relationship Style on the Monogamy–Nonmonogamy Continuum,” Kaufman-Rosenberg sought to examine two central questions. The first addressed the existence of a continuum, and the second asked whether people desire one type of relationship, such as an open relationship, while living in another, and what prevents them from living in alignment with their true desires.
2 View gallery
'It is possible to carry one love in the heart while at the same time opening oneself to the possibility of another love'
(Photo: Shutterstock)
All respondents were Israeli and were recruited through social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram and Telegram, as well as through partnerships Kaufman-Rosenberg formed with administrators of groups focused on nonmonogamy. “I was surprised by how curious people were about the questionnaire,” she says. “Many returned to me with questions and insights that allowed me to expand the scope of the research and refine the online questionnaires I distributed.”
More than 880 people volunteered to respond. Kaufman-Rosenberg ultimately excluded anyone who was not currently in a relationship, as well as those living in monogamous relationships while secretly cheating. After removing singles, cheaters and those practicing nonmonogamy in secret, the final sample included 362 women and men in committed relationships. The questionnaire examined three central dimensions related to nonmonogamy: what people want or feel regarding relationship structures; how they define themselves in terms of relationship identity; and what their relationship lives actually look like in practice. “
“The study shows that in an ideal world, 16% of people in monogamous relationships would want a nonmonogamous relationship, and 41% of monogamous participants expressed a desire for sexual nonmonogamy.”
The questions examined nonmonogamy from different perspectives, including sexual subjectivity and levels of conformity,” she explains. “Based on existing research and literature, which often focuses on the stigma experienced by people who live in nonmonogamous relationships, we know there is a link between what people want, how they live in practice and the level of social acceptance they experience.”
How many people reported a desire or longing for nonmonogamy despite living in monogamy?
“Because desire is a broad concept, we divided it into four dimensions. First, willingness to engage in nonmonogamy. This refers to specific nonmonogamous scenarios, such as attending a swingers party, experimenting with threesomes, or having sexual relationships with a third party without secrecy. Here, 6 percent of monogamous participants expressed willingness to engage in nonmonogamy within their current relationship. Second, ideal relationship preference. We asked which relationship style participants would choose in an optimal world without constraints. In this dimension, 16 percent of monogamous participants said they would prefer a nonmonogamous relationship. Third, desire for sexual nonmonogamy. Here, 41 percent of monogamous participants expressed a desire for sexual nonmonogamy. Fourth, desire for romantic nonmonogamy. In this category, fewer than 1 percent of monogamous participants expressed a desire for romantic nonmonogamy.”
What do these numbers mean?
“These percentages show that people can live in monogamy while simultaneously experiencing desire or curiosity toward nonmonogamy, without that making them ‘nonmonogamous’ in a definitional sense. Because most public, therapeutic and academic discourse still operates within a dichotomy in which monogamy equals commitment, stability and morality, while nonmonogamy represents freedom, multiplicity and deviation from the norm, the findings demonstrate that emotional commitment can exist alongside other desires. Desire is not the same as behavior, and intimate identity is not determined solely by what happens in practice.”
Were there gender differences?
“Yes. In the study, men reported higher average levels of desire for nonmonogamy, particularly in the sexual dimension, and showed a smaller gap between desire and actual behavior. Women, by contrast, reported more moderate levels of desire for nonmonogamy, and were less likely to translate that desire into a nonmonogamous lifestyle. In other words, desire, curiosity or openness can exist across sexual, romantic and ideal dimensions, but the proportion of women actually living in nonmonogamy is lower than that of men, even when desire levels are similar.”
What explains those differences?
“It is likely tied more strongly to self-perception, sexual subjectivity and identity. Among women, the desire exists, but its translation into actual choice occurs less frequently. We did not directly examine why, but the assumption is that women experience less internal legitimacy and face greater social norms, as well as higher levels of social criticism.”
“Among women, there is desire for nonmonogamy, curiosity, openness or longing that appears across different dimensions, but the proportion of women who actually live in nonmonogamous relationships is lower than that of men.”
“These findings also carry broader social implications,” she says. “In a society where monogamy is culturally sanctified through films, romantic narratives and social expectations, and where any deviation is often religiously and traditionally condemned, nonmonogamy is sometimes perceived as moral deviance rather than a legitimate identity position along a human continuum. This condemnation is often accompanied by discourse of contempt, suspicion and hostility, and it affects not only individuals and couples but also seeps into the therapeutic field.”
To that extent?
“Absolutely. Therapists who lack a professional language for engaging with this complexity may, even unintentionally, reproduce monogamous norms, miss their clients’ internal conflicts and respond with judgment rather than clinical curiosity. My findings emphasize the need to develop therapeutic and social discourse that recognizes a range of intimate possibilities and allows a safe space for identity exploration not dictated by a single cultural script.” “I can tell you that in the clinic, almost any desire that is forbidden to speak about eventually turns into shame, secrecy and emotional distance. Therapeutic work is not for or against any specific relationship structure, but for clarity, responsibility and the ability to listen to internal gaps without rushing to close them. Therapists need to understand that not every expanding feeling is betrayal. Apparently, we are all capable of loving more and more.”
“Therapists who are not equipped with a professional language for a nuanced understanding of nonmonogamy may, even unintentionally, reproduce monogamous norms, overlook their clients’ internal conflicts and respond with judgment rather than clinical curiosity.”
“In my clinic, when I tell people that it is normal and natural for one partner to still feel something for an ex or to fantasize about someone else, sometimes you can literally hear the breath of relief leave their lungs. Historically, people simply accepted these feelings. Even the Bible accepted multiple sexual relationships. But Christian culture, romantic fiction and Walt Disney narratives introduced a great deal of guilt into relationships. My research shows that another choice is possible, or as I called it, ‘Fifty Shades of Choice.’”
Wanting is allowed, acting is forbidden
Kaufman-Rosenberg, who has been married to the same man for 20 years and is raising four children with him, conducted the study during the period of the ‘Swords of Iron’ war, a time when Israel saw a growing number of women who lost their partners in the fighting. “The findings take on added depth in the context of widows and widowers,” she says. “For many of them, the emergence of desire for a new relationship is not about thrill-seeking, but about an internal struggle between loyalty to memory and longing for life. Often there is a deep sense that ‘I am allowed to want, but forbidden to act.’”
“For me, seeing love as a continuum rather than a dichotomy of ‘loyalty versus betrayal’ allows us to understand how one can carry one love in the heart while opening to the possibility of another, without one canceling out the other.” “This was not something we asked directly in the study, but I felt the solution was right there. If we grant therapeutic and social legitimacy to this perspective, guilt, judgment and social criticism no longer have to be a battlefield that these women are forced to fight within. It is possible to love more and more, to expand and hold two loves or more at the same time, without harming any of them. It normalizes, it enables and it brings relief.”