Sexual Autonomy in Relationships: Are We Redefining Commitment or Just Kidding Ourselves?
Wednesday, January 8, 2025.
The concept of Sexual Autonomy within committed relationships has captured significant attention in our modern American relationship discourse.
By emphasizing individual freedom to explore sexual identities and desires, this approach challenges traditional monogamy.
While some hail it as a pathway to deeper authenticity and relational satisfaction, others remain skeptical about Sexual Autonomy, and its practical and emotional implications.
As a couples therapist, I find myself grappling with the dire social pitfalls of this self-absorbed trend.
Add in considerations like paternity, evolutionary psychology, and emotional security, and the waters get even murkier.
Sexual Autonomy: What Is It?
Sexual Autonomy suggests that fidelity in relationships is no longer exclusively defined by sexual exclusivity. This notion indicates a marginalization of the Christian ethos in the family system.
Some couples are pursuing consensual non-monogamy (CNM)—which includes open relationships, polyamory, and “designer monogamy”—where the boundaries are co-created based on individual needs and agreements. Proponents argue that such arrangements foster honesty, sexual satisfaction, and personal growth.
The Research on Sexual Autonomy
Several studies highlight the benefits and challenges of Sexual Autonomy:
Well-Being in CNM?
Rubel and Bogaert (2014) found that folks in CNM relationships report similar levels of psychological well-being and relational satisfaction compared to those in monogamous relationships. This challenges the notion that monogamy is inherently better for emotional health (Rubel & Bogaert, 2014).Individual Traits
Arter and Bunge (2021) discovered that folks drawn to CNM often exhibit high levels of openness and curiosity, suggesting that this relational structure may not suit everyone equally (Arter & Bunge, 2021).Sexual Satisfaction and Autonomy
Tóth-Király et al. (2019) found that Sexual Autonomy correlates with increased satisfaction and positive emotional experiences in intimate encounters (Tóth-Király et al., 2019).
Esther Perel’s Perspective
Esther Perel has explored Sexual Autonomy extensively in her work, emphasizing that modern relationships often function as a platform for self-actualization.
She argues that CNM reflects the cultural shift toward an "identity economy," where partners seek to help each other grow into their fullest selves. However, she stresses that such arrangements require equality, transparency, and robust communication to succeed (MensHealth.com.au).
In her podcast Where Should We Begin?, Perel discusses the challenges of CNM, including the intense emotional labor required to manage jealousy, set boundaries, and maintain trust (EstherPerel.com).
Implications of Sexual Autonomy
Redefining Fidelity
Sexual Autonomy reframes fidelity as adherence to mutually negotiated agreements, rather than exclusivity. While liberating for some, this can create anxiety for others, particularly those who equate exclusivity with commitment, which, frankly, is most people.Emotional Complexity
CNM demands high levels of communication and emotional intelligence. Even minor breaches of agreement can trigger significant emotional fallout, particularly around deeply ingrained fears of abandonment or betrayal. Are we that saintly and deeply communicative, as well as horny? Probably not. LOL.Compatibility Issues
Sexual Autonomy may be better suited for the folks with high openness to experience, but will reliably destabilize partners who value predictability and security.
The Problem of Paternity
From an evolutionary psychology standpoint, sexual autonomy introduces a significant challenge: responsibility of paternity.
Historically, sexual exclusivity served as a mechanism for men to ensure their genetic lineage. In evolutionary terms, this is critical—resources, time, and effort are allocated more confidently when a man knows his offspring carry his DNA.
Evolutionary Roots of Jealousy
Evolutionary psychologists suggest that jealousy evolved as a safeguard against infidelity to protect genetic investment. Men are more likely to exhibit jealousy over sexual infidelity, while women often prioritize emotional infidelity. CNM, by design, disrupts these evolutionary signals. What happens next?Resource Allocation
Sexual autonomy destabilizes traditional patterns of resource allocation within relationships. If parental responsibility is evaded, it undermines long-term investment in offspring—a cornerstone of evolutionary parenting strategies. In other words, kids are expensive. There will be always be artful dodgers. Will we tax our family court system as these sexual minorities battle with their exes? Probably, in any case.Cultural Overlay
While modern contraception and DNA testing address some of these concerns, the emotional and psychological impact of paternity uncertainty may persist, reflecting deeply ingrained evolutionary imperatives.
On the other hand, who gives a sh*t? We’ve become so self-absorbed, we see kids as an expensive hobby that we can do without. We enjoy therapists who will validate our personal preferences to the brink of our extinction, just because we prefer to be delightfully unencumbered by kiddos or exclusive commitiments.
A Therapist’s Dire Warning
Let’s not promote this nonsense. The idea of Sexual Autonomy is inherently decadent, and laden with risk. Here’s why:
Trust and Emotional Safety
Trust is fragile, and introducing Sexual Autonomy will amplify insecurities. The emotional labor required to maintain CNM agreements is naively underestimated. This is a key point that is given short shrift by the poly-exitable and the trend chasers. Emotional labor matters.The Paternity Problem
While modern couples may not explicitly prioritize genetic lineage, the evolutionary underpinnings of jealousy and trust issues remain relevant. The uncertainty surrounding sexual boundaries may excite primal fears, even in contemporary contexts.Cultural Mismatch
Sexual Autonomy plays well in progressive contexts, but conflicts with traditional or religious values, creating more potential for friction within families or communities.
Final Thoughts
Sexual Autonomy challenges us to reconsider long-held assumptions about intimacy, fidelity, and commitment. I’d rather not, bless your heart.
While it promises exciting opportunities for growth and authenticity, it just presents complex emotional, legal, logistical, and evolutionary challenges that we can do without, thank you very much.
For couples exploring this path, therapy might provide a space to navigate motivations, boundaries, and expectations. But if you work with me, I’ll just tell you it’s a tragically stupid idea.
Ultimately, the success of Sexual Autonomy depends on the unique dynamics of each relationship—and the willingness of both partners to engage in the ongoing work it demands. That’s where the erotic calculus typically goes awry.
Thought leaders should not chase trends, they should rather endeavor to shape them toward healthier adaptation for the culture at large.
Monogamy builds civilizations, Sexual Autonomy does not.
Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Arter, J. L., & Bunge, E. L. (2021). Individuals with persistent desire for consensual non-monogamy. Archives of Sexual Behavior. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-021-00667-7
Perel, E. (n.d.). The arc of love - The poly dinner party. Where Should We Begin? Podcast. Retrieved from https://www.estherperel.com/podcasts/the-arc-of-love---the-poly-dinner-party
Rubel, A. N., & Bogaert, A. F. (2014). Consensual nonmonogamy: Psychological well-being and relationship quality correlates. The Journal of Sex Research, 52(9), 961–982. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265392916
Tóth-Király, I., Morin, A. J. S., & Bőthe, B. (2019). Examining sexual motivation profiles and their correlates using latent profile analysis. Journal of Sex Research, 56(4-5), 663–677. Retrieved from https://www.lrcs.uqam.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Toth-Kiraly-et-al.-2019.pdf