When intimacy becomes plural

When we talk about love and intimacy, we often imagine two people in a “serious” relationship, for better or for worse. However, alternatives to this model of couplehood have gradually gained visibility, particularly those in which exclusivity is not central. What are these alternatives, and who are the people who embrace them? 

It is often thought that love is a timeless and universal feeling, something everyone seeks through a long-term and exclusive romantic relationship. However, what is considered a “good” relationship has constantly evolved with time and across societies. In the last decades, the ways in which people experience intimacy have gradually evolved. Traditional institutions such as family, religion and the State now play a less central role, specifically thanks to the influence of the queer and the feminist movements. If romantic and sexual exclusivity remains the main rule for most people1, alternative forms of romantic relationships have progressively gained visibility. Among these are those that involve the possibility of having many of partners (whether sexual or romantic), in which all individuals involved agree to openness in the relationship. What do these new forms of relationships tell us about love and intimacy? Do they mark the end of romantic love, or rather its evolution? 

Different forms of plurality 

Many terms can be used to describe plural relationships, and research does not always agree on the various practices they encompass2. While people who identify with these relationships sometimes have varying definitions according to different criteria, they can nevertheless be grouped into three main categories, some of which assume the existence of a couple, and others that do not 3 :

Regardless of the configuration or the meaning individuals give to them, these plural relationships differ from infidelity or polygamy. Such plural forms of relationships are sometimes referred to as ethical non-monogamies or consensual non-monogamies, as they involve open dialogue in order to reach mutual agreement among the people involved. Communication and reciprocity are therefore essential, with a constant effort to balance each person’s needs and desires. However, these definitions remain theoretical, and the question arises as to how people who identify as being in one of these types of relationships actually experience them. Following interviews conducted with twenty individuals aged 27 to 51, four main findings emerged from my reseach, shedding light on issues surrounding modern love and intimacy experiences. 

The couple remains a central reference in romantic intimacy 

A first significant finding is that the couple—defined as a committed, privileged, and long-term relationship—remains a strong and structuring reference point for the participants. One might think that entering a non-exclusive relationship represents an escape from the couple or simply an expression of personal desire, which is not the case. For example, when two people decide to open their relationship (to become an open couple), this decision is not made unilaterally, and any new encounter that threatens the stability of their relationship might lead them to close it again, temporarily or for a longer period. Among those who engage in group sex practices, more or less strict rules may be established, such as reserving certain practices for the primary couple (e.g., no penetration outside the couple), or agreeing to engage only in the presence of one another. Even for some polyamorous individuals (a form of plural love), living together can give a particular relationship more importance, as cohabitation comes with certain obligations. 

Hence, the couple remains a central reference point that allows, as well as structure how to be and behave together, to project oneself into the future through shared life goals (for example, having children, buying a house, spending meaningful time together, etc.). While strong emotional bonds may be formed with other partners outside the primary relationship, the couple and its shared project retain a central role.

Plural relationships tend to evolve with time 

Commitment within a non-exclusive configuration is never definitive. On the contrary, both monogamous and non-monogamous relationship forms are rarely linear throughout life. Thus, a relationship may become exclusive again for a period following a particular event (for example, a death, doubts about the stability of the main relationship, parenthood), shift from a strictly sexual agreement to a form of plural love, or include moments of group sex when circumstances allow. For example, a couple engaging in group sex might develop a regular intimate connection with another couple, expressing affection without necessarily identifying as polyamorous. Similarly, an open couple might gradually move toward plural love, such as polyamory, if feelings develop for a lover. The relationship agreement is frequently renegotiated, adapting to the changing circumstances of life, new encounters, or evolving desires, by mixing different forms of non-exclusivity or occasionally returning to sexual or romantic exclusivity for varying periods of time. 

Life stages influence relationship configuration

Results show that one’s stage of life, more than self-identification, influences the relationship configuration chosen by partners. While adolescence is generally characterized as a time when exclusive, long-term relationships are sought4 entering college or university often becomes a period of experimentation and questioning of exclusivity in relationships. Exposed to different relationship models and benefiting from the anonymity of larger cities, individuals are more likely to form simultaneous or parallel relationships, explore alternative forms of intimacy, or participate in group sex experiences5. However, the thirties often mark a return to the traditional exclusive couple, usually in the context of starting a family. Parenthood, whether at the arrival of children or as they become more independent, can lead to a renegotiation of exclusivity, particularly among women who often report feeling reduced to a maternal role. Finally, the forties often bring a reevaluation of norms, and new plural forms of intimacy may emerge during this period. It is also a stage of life where individuals may decide to live more for themselves and adopt a more critical view of the norms they once followed. For example, one woman who had lived a completely monogamous life radically changed course in her early forties, discovering an attraction to women and entering a trouple, a romantic relationship among three people, with her lover and another woman.

Being in plural relationships: a delicate balance between the self, one another, and the couple

When discussing romantic and sexual intimacy, it is often said that love has died, destroyed by the selfishness of modern society6. However, the study of plural relationships reveals more nuanced realities. Those who engage in non-exclusive relationships do not do so unilaterally; rather, they navigate conflicting or opposing desires and expectations, what I call triple fidelity: 

• Fidelity to oneself: honoring one’s own desires and personal aspirations.

• Fidelity to one’s partner: caring for the other in their individuality.

• Fidelity to the couple: preserving the shared project built together (daily life, shared memories, parenthood, etc.).

The desire to open a relationship or explore non-exclusive arrangements can thus create tension among these three forms of fidelity. A person may feel the desire, out of fantasy or a need for self-exploration outside the relationship (fidelity to oneself) but may set it aside out of consideration for a hesitant partner (fidelity to the other), or to protect the longevity of the couple’s shared project (fidelity to the couple). Depending on one’s stage of life, certain forms of fidelity may take precedence. Younger individuals tend to prioritize fidelity to the couple and to the partner, while aging often brings a stronger focus on fidelity to oneself. 

Conclusion

People who live in non-exclusive relationships do not reject love or commitment. On the contrary, their representations of love are much the same as those in exclusive relationships. They describe the same need to be moved, to love and be loved, and they remain deeply devoted to the promises made to those they cherish. The tension, therefore, does not stem from an inability to love, but rather from the highly ambivalent nature of what a couple is expected to be today. A couple is supposed to be both the space that allows for the most authentic expression of the self and the space that encourages fusion and self-sacrifice in the name of the shared relationship project. However, asking one person to be simultaneously a desirable lover, a faithful best friend, and a caring co-parent can sometimes be an overwhelming expectation. Plural relationships can thus represent an attempt to respond to these contradictory demands, between maintaining the relationship and expressing one’s individuality. If plural relationships sometimes represent a deep-seated identity, they can also emerge at any stage of life and for a variety of reasons. Rather than opposing them to monogamy, it may be more relevant to view them as one intimate and relational possibility among others. Love and sexuality are not fixed elements that can be permanently confined within a single form, the couple, that would sustain its flame forever. They evolve, change, and transform throughout life. And while they sometimes exist in the singular, they can also be lived in the plural.

How to cite this article: Dusseau, F. (2025, November 10). When intimacy becomes plural. TRACE blog. https://natachagodbout.com/en/blog/when-intimacy-becomes-plural

The publication of this article was made possible thanks to our partner, the Interdisciplinary Research Centre on Intimate Relationship Problems and Sexual Abuse (CRIPCAS), and the Fonds de recherche du Québec. 

• 1

  Brake, E. (2011). Minimizing marriage: Marriage, morality, and the law. Oxford University Press.

• 2

  Ferrer, J. N. (2021). Love and freedom : Transcending monogamy and polyamory. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

• 3

  Matsick, J. L., Conley, T. D., Ziegler, A., Moors, A. C. & Rubin, J. D. (2014). Love and sex: Polyamorous relationships are perceived more favourably than swinging and open relationships. Psychology and Sexuality, 5(4), 339‑348. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2013.832934

• 4

  Clair, I. (2023). Les Choses sérieuses. Enquête sur les amours adolescentes. Seuil.

• 5

  Frank, K. (2013). Plays well in groups: A journey through the world of group sex. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

• 6

  Illouz, E. (2020). La Fin de l’amour. Enquête sur un désarroi contemporain. Seuil.