2015
DOI: 10.3998/ergo.12405314.0002.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modal Monogamy

Abstract: Patience: Why, how could I love him and love you too? You can't love two people at once! Bunthorne: [Aside.] Oh, can't you, though! [Aloud.] I don't believe you know what love is! Patience: [Sighing.] Yes, I do. There was a happy time when I didn't, but a bitter experience has taught me.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
(4 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…11. Despite the widespread variety of arguments for the superiority or advantageousness of monogamy (e.g., Barash & Lipton, 2009;Fisher, 2004;Jenkins, 2015;Masters, 2007) or polyamory (e.g., Barker & Langdridge, 2010b;Bergstrand & Sinski, 2010;Petrella, 2007), the available empirical evidence supports a more egalitarian and pluralistic scenario (see Ferrer, 2018a). In a comparative study of 284 selfidentified monogamous and polyamorous men and women, for example, Morrison, Beaulieu, Brockman, and Beaglaoich (2013) found no significant group differences in scores indicative of relational quality (i.e., passion, trust, and attachment)-although poly men and women showed greater levels of intimacy as measured by the Intimacy Attitude Scale-Revised (IAS-R; Amidon, Kumar, & Treadwell, 1983).…”
Section: Conclusion: Beyond Monogamy and Polyamorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11. Despite the widespread variety of arguments for the superiority or advantageousness of monogamy (e.g., Barash & Lipton, 2009;Fisher, 2004;Jenkins, 2015;Masters, 2007) or polyamory (e.g., Barker & Langdridge, 2010b;Bergstrand & Sinski, 2010;Petrella, 2007), the available empirical evidence supports a more egalitarian and pluralistic scenario (see Ferrer, 2018a). In a comparative study of 284 selfidentified monogamous and polyamorous men and women, for example, Morrison, Beaulieu, Brockman, and Beaglaoich (2013) found no significant group differences in scores indicative of relational quality (i.e., passion, trust, and attachment)-although poly men and women showed greater levels of intimacy as measured by the Intimacy Attitude Scale-Revised (IAS-R; Amidon, Kumar, & Treadwell, 1983).…”
Section: Conclusion: Beyond Monogamy and Polyamorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The author declares no conflicts of interest. ORCID Kyle York https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8103-9828 ENDNOTES 1 See, for example: Carrie Jenkins (2015) and Luke Brunning (2016).…”
Section: Funding Informationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moral monogamy is the hypothesis that ‘the only morally permissible romantic love relationships are monogamous ones’. Modal monogamy is the hypothesis that, ‘the only metaphysically possible romantic love relationships are monogamous ones’ (Jenkins 2015, p. 175). The hegemonic norm of monogamy has also been called ‘mononormativity’.…”
Section: Sexual Infidelity and The Norm Of Monogamymentioning
confidence: 99%