Gender Similarities and Differences in Casual Sex Acceptance Among Lesbian Women and Gay Men.

Popular wisdom and scientific evidence suggest women desire and engage in casual sex less frequently than men; however, theories of gender differences in sexuality are often formulated in light of heterosexual relations. Less is understood about sexual behavior among lesbian and gay people, or individuals in which there is arguably less motivation to pursue sex for reproductive purposes and fewer expectations for people to behave in gender-typical ways. Drawing from scripts theory and pleasure theory, in two studies (N1 = 465; N2 = 487) we examined lesbian and gay people's acceptance of casual sex. We asked participants who had been propositioned for casual sex whether they accepted the offer and to rate their perceptions of the proposer's sexual capabilities and sexual orientation. They also reported on their awareness of stigma surrounding casual sex. We found a gender difference in acceptance: Gay men were more likely than lesbian women to have accepted a casual sex offer from other gay/lesbian people, and this difference was mediated by participants' stigma awareness. We also found the proposer's sexual orientation played a role in people's acceptance. Lesbian women and gay men were equally likely to accept offers from bisexual proposers but expressed different acceptance rates with "straight-but-curious" proposers, which was mediated by expected pleasure. We discuss dynamics within lesbian and gay communities and implications for studying theories of sexual behavior and gender differences beyond heterosexual contexts.

Investigation of Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships.

We proposed that the premise that monogamy is the exemplary form of romantic partnership underlies much theory and research on relationship quality, and we addressed how this bias has prompted methodological issues that make it difficult to effectively address the quality of nonmonogamous relationships. Because the idea that consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships are functional (i.e., satisfying and of high quality) is controversial, we included a basic study to assess, in a variety of ways, the quality of these relationships. In that study, we found few differences in relationship functioning between individuals engaged in monogamy and those in CNM relationships. We then considered how existing theories could help researchers to understand CNM relationships and how CNM relationships could shed light on relationship processes, and we proposed a model of how CNM and monogamous relationships differ. Finally, in a second study, we determined that even researchers who present data about CNM are affected by the stigma surrounding such relationships. That is, researchers presenting findings favoring polyamory were perceived as more biased than researchers presenting findings favoring monogamy.

Re-examining the effectiveness of monogamy as an STI-preventive strategy.

The utility of monogamy (in practice) as a strategy for preventing sexually transmitted infections (STIs) was investigated. By reviewing recent literature surrounding monogamous relationships and sexual behaviors, the authors determined that monogamy might not prevent against STIs as expected. First, the authors elucidate the ways in which public health officials and the general public define and interpret monogamy and discuss how this contributes to monogamy as an ineffectual STI prevention strategy. Second, the authors provide evidence that individuals' compliance with monogamy is likely to be low, similar to rates of compliance with other medical advice. Lastly, the authors draw upon recent research findings suggesting that people who label themselves as monogamous are less likely to engage in safer sex behaviors than people who have an explicit agreement with their partner to be non-monogamous. Future research and clinical directions to promote sexual health and destigmatize sexual behaviors are considered.

Condom use errors among sexually unfaithful and consensually nonmonogamous individuals.

This research involved comparisons of the condom use behaviours of people who are in monogamous relationships but who have engaged in extradyadic sex (i.e. committed infidelity) to those who are in consensually nonmonogamous (CNM) relationships. Consensual nonmonogamy is the practice of openly having multiple sexual or romantic partners simultaneously, with the full knowledge and consent of all participating partners. Participants in CNM relationships used condoms more correctly in their last instance of intercourse than those who were committing infidelity.

A critical examination of popular assumptions about the benefits and outcomes of monogamous relationships.

In this article, we critically examine the social institution of monogamy. First, we discuss the lack of an adequate and consistent definition of the construct of monogamy and consider how common monogamy is. Next, we address perceived benefits of monogamy and whether those ostensible benefits are supported by empirical evidence. We conclude that evidence for the benefits of monogamy relative to other relationship styles is currently lacking, suggesting that, for those who choose it, consensual non-monogamy may be a viable alternative to monogamy. Implications for theories of close relationships are discussed.

Unfaithful individuals are less likely to practice safer sex than openly nonmonogamous individuals.

INTRODUCTION: Given the prevalence and harm of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), there is a need to examine safer sex strategies in the context of romantic relationships and extradyadic sexual encounters. Sexual infidelity is associated with a variety of detrimental psychosocial outcomes; however, little research has addressed the sexual health ramifications of sexually unfaithful partners and members of other high-risk nonmonogamous lifestyles. AIMS: To determine whether sexually unfaithful individuals or "negotiated nonmonogamous" individuals are more likely to engage in sexual health risk reduction behaviors during extradyadic encounters and with their primary partner. METHOD: Data were collected via an anonymous Internet-based study. Several hundred sexually unfaithful individuals and individuals with a negotiated nonmonogamy agreement completed a sexual health questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Self-reported measures of risk reduction behaviors within the primary relationship and risk reduction behaviors during the extradyadic encounter were assessed. RESULTS: Sexually unfaithful participants demonstrated significantly lower rates of protective sexual health behaviors both within their primary partnerships and during their extradyadic sexual encounters. Sexually unfaithful participants were also less likely to engage in frequent STI testing, and less likely to discuss safer sex concerns with new partners. CONCLUSIONS: These data add to the literature on the negative effects of sexual unfaithfulness. Understanding rates of nonengagement in safer sex strategies will be helpful to those who lead efforts to increase condom use and other preventive STI measures.