Abstract:This exploratory study used qualitative methods to gain a richer understanding of the relational dynamics in modern swinging relationships. Swinging was defined at the onset of the study as sexual activities that married couples engage in with people other than their spouses. Twenty people (10 couples) volunteered and were interviewed using computer-mediated communication. Symbolic interactionism provides the theoretical framework for the study. Within the construct of relational dynamics, themes of power and … Show more
“…For example, the questions on prioritizing one’s primary relationship by avoiding emotional relationships with those outside it suggested a level of attachment within the primary relationship (as noted by Giddens, and Moors et al, ). The ability of the men, in particular, to agree with the rules presented in the survey also suggests the interaction effect discussed in previous research (e.g., Vaillancourt and Few‐Demo, ). Finally, the emphasis on privacy while also engaging in non‐normative behaviour reinforces the challenge the swinging population is facing with balancing societal and personal norms (as noted by Edgar, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…The spontaneity of engaging in sex with others varies, so rules about boundaries are relatively flexible, while rules focused on preventing hostile, uncomfortable or unhealthy situations are impermeable (Frank, 2013;Harviainen and Frank, 2016). Regardless, these explicit and implicit rules are vital to the health of the primary relationship and have been a consistent finding for researchers (Bentzen and Traeen, 2014;Bergstrand and Sinski, 2010;Vaillancourt and Few-Demo, 2014).…”
Section: Summary Of the Modelmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…While the studies performed on CNMs’ relationships have been relatively few, the number of theoretical perspectives used to understand them has varied quite widely. Six of the most recent peer‐reviewed publications on CNMs have, in fact, utilized six different frameworks to interpret their results: repressive hypothesis (Edgar, ), detraditionalization thesis (Green et al, ), symbolic interactionism (Vaillancourt and Few‐Demo, ), sexual scripts (Benzen and Traeen, ), and attachment styles (Moors, Conley, Edelstein and Chopik, ). Each of these models will be briefly summarized to explain their contribution to understanding the CNMs’ community.…”
Researchers studying consensual non‐monogamous relationships have traditionally used theoretical lenses that were based on heteronormative, monogamous couples’ experiences. An exception to these theoretical models was a grounded theory formed by Kimberly and Hans (2017) that explored how swinging relationships were initiated and maintained. This study further tests this theory by having 273 self‐identified swingers complete a quantitative, online measurement based on the model’s concepts and themes. Results further supported that theoretical model with two notable exceptions: participants disagreed with having high self‐esteem prior to entering the swinging lifestyle and that men (rather than women) screened potential partners. Nevertheless, therapists can use the measurement as a tool to guide dialogue with couples that are interested in or are currently participating in a non‐monogamous relationship.
“…For example, the questions on prioritizing one’s primary relationship by avoiding emotional relationships with those outside it suggested a level of attachment within the primary relationship (as noted by Giddens, and Moors et al, ). The ability of the men, in particular, to agree with the rules presented in the survey also suggests the interaction effect discussed in previous research (e.g., Vaillancourt and Few‐Demo, ). Finally, the emphasis on privacy while also engaging in non‐normative behaviour reinforces the challenge the swinging population is facing with balancing societal and personal norms (as noted by Edgar, ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…The spontaneity of engaging in sex with others varies, so rules about boundaries are relatively flexible, while rules focused on preventing hostile, uncomfortable or unhealthy situations are impermeable (Frank, 2013;Harviainen and Frank, 2016). Regardless, these explicit and implicit rules are vital to the health of the primary relationship and have been a consistent finding for researchers (Bentzen and Traeen, 2014;Bergstrand and Sinski, 2010;Vaillancourt and Few-Demo, 2014).…”
Section: Summary Of the Modelmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…While the studies performed on CNMs’ relationships have been relatively few, the number of theoretical perspectives used to understand them has varied quite widely. Six of the most recent peer‐reviewed publications on CNMs have, in fact, utilized six different frameworks to interpret their results: repressive hypothesis (Edgar, ), detraditionalization thesis (Green et al, ), symbolic interactionism (Vaillancourt and Few‐Demo, ), sexual scripts (Benzen and Traeen, ), and attachment styles (Moors, Conley, Edelstein and Chopik, ). Each of these models will be briefly summarized to explain their contribution to understanding the CNMs’ community.…”
Researchers studying consensual non‐monogamous relationships have traditionally used theoretical lenses that were based on heteronormative, monogamous couples’ experiences. An exception to these theoretical models was a grounded theory formed by Kimberly and Hans (2017) that explored how swinging relationships were initiated and maintained. This study further tests this theory by having 273 self‐identified swingers complete a quantitative, online measurement based on the model’s concepts and themes. Results further supported that theoretical model with two notable exceptions: participants disagreed with having high self‐esteem prior to entering the swinging lifestyle and that men (rather than women) screened potential partners. Nevertheless, therapists can use the measurement as a tool to guide dialogue with couples that are interested in or are currently participating in a non‐monogamous relationship.
“…This is not to suggest that all heterosexuals are tied to a traditional or structured conception of marital monogamy. Quite the contrary, research demonstrates that some heterosexuals are active participants in nontraditional sexual arrangements, including polyamorous groups; swingers networks; and bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, sadism and masochism (BDSM) communities that decouple monogamous norms and practices from marital status (Damon, ; de Visser & McDonald, ; Gould, ; Vaillancourt & Few‐Demo, ; Weiss, ). Nevertheless, in the present study, most heterosexuals remained beholden to a tradition of marital monogamy, both as a personal ideal and a marital practice.…”
Within the sociological literature on intimate life, a detraditionalization thesis outlines a marked shift in the construction of marriage in post‐World War II Western societies, suggesting a growing focus on emotional and sexual satisfaction within the marital dyad (Cherlin, 2004; Giddens, 1992). In this article the authors investigated one aspect of marital relations in light of the detraditionalization thesis: marital monogamy. Drawing from 90 in‐depth interviews with both heterosexual and same‐sex married participants in Canada, they found that the detraditionalization thesis appears to capture best the extension of multicultural norms to abstract ideals about marital monogamy, rather than an actual shift in marital sexual practices, particularly among heterosexual respondents. These data call out for greater attention to both the social mediation of Giddens's detraditionalization thesis and a more nuanced concept of marital fidelity than a simple binary axis of “monogamous/nonmonogamous” permits.
“…Despite agreeing boundaries at the outset seemingly the norm, qualitative research suggests that rules regarding condom use in swinging encounters are less frequently established and/or adhered to 8. Perhaps unsurprising, studies have reported that only a small minority of swingers use condoms regularly or consistently 10 11. When discussed, the decision of whether or not to use condoms is said to depend on various factors, including whether the couples have had previous encounters together (although Kimberly and Hans found that having regular or repeat encounters with other swingers was rare, reflecting how variety is often the raison d'etre for swinging) and their knowledge of the extent to which the other couple engage in swinging.…”
Sexual health services in the UK are under increasing financial pressure [1] so the need to ensure that those at greatest risk of STIs and HIV receive appropriate care is greater than ever. While some men who have sex with men (MSM) have long been recognised as one such population group[2] with wellestablished systems to identify them, others such as swingers are not as the paper by Dukers-Muijrers et al highlights [3]. Their data from sexual health clinics in the Netherlands show how patients who, when asked, identified as swingers and/or who reported partner-swapping, having sex with other couples together with their partner, or visiting sex clubs with for couples, also reported other behaviours known to be important for STI/HIV transmission including larger numbers of partners, condomless sex, paid and same-sex partners [3]. I emphasise 'when asked' as these questions were not routinely asked in one of the study clinics, meaning that many swingers will have missed out on receiving the care they needed, with implications for their own, their partners', and public health. The secrecy surrounding swinging and the club-like nature of the swinging community means that developing and delivering effective interventions to reduce STI transmission in this hidden population are likely to be challenging. Working with its gate-keepers (e.g. website hosts and providers, convention organisers) will be key to reach those who choose the lifestyle [7] as privacy is at the heart
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.