Instead of assuming that serial monogamy is inherently bad, what if we reexamined this relationship structure through the lens of ethical non-monogamy? Here are all the ways we’ve misunderstood sequential polyamory. 

Instead of assuming serial monogamy is bad, what if we considered it as a form of ethical non-monogamy? Here are all the ways serial monogamy is commonly misunderstood.

Serial Monogamy: Why It Isn’t Bad

Serial Monogamy Isn’t Bad: Why It Should Be Seen as a Valid Form of ENM

Across the board, people tend to despise the concept of serial monogamy. But what if we’ve misunderstood what it means to have consecutive committed relationships over the course of a lifetime? Instead of assuming that serial monogamy is inherently bad, what if we reexamined this relationship structure through the lens of ethical 

? Here are all the ways we’ve misunderstood sequential polyamory. 

If you’re wondering ‘what is serial monogamy’, Google it and you’ll find endless articles that list all the reasons it’s unhealthy, give tips on how to break the cycle, and offer signs to look for to ensure you’re not dating a serial monogamist. The negativity towards serial monogamy is as rampant as it is vehement. I disagree that serial monogamy is inherently bad, and instead suggest we claim it as a valid form of polyamory instead. Including serial monogamy under the ENM umbrella, offers us the possibility to help folks who want to have many relationships over the course of their lives do so in a thoughtful way. 

Serial monogamists: what’s with all the hate? 

My best guess is that the major reason why serial monogamists are seen with contempt is that they break one of the fundamental assumptions of compulsory monogamy - that you must choose a partner for life. Because serial monogamists “jump” from partner to partner, rather than committing to one person long-term, they challenge the expectations that a dyadic partnership must inherently last forever. While many (most) monogamous relationships eventually dissolve, serial monogamists don’t try to hide this fact, engendering backlash. Let’s be real, people who have bought into the myth of compulsory monogamy generally don’t like being challenged on how realistic these relationship expectations are. It’s easier to believe that you can own YOUR person for a lifetime simply by making wedding vows, than having to grapple with the uncertainty and discomfort of recognizing that you’re in a relationship with an autonomous person who could easily decide on any given day that they would rather be with someone else. 

Because serial monogamists “jump” from partner to partner, rather than committing to one person long-term, they challenge the expectations that a dyadic partnership must inherently last forever. 

Negativity from your monogamist social circle 

Like many people in alternative relationships, serial monogamists are reprimanded by their peers and family for not adhering to the social contract of compulsory monogamy. Serial monogamists are branded as flaky inconsiderate people with broken attachment styles. And sure, that may be true for some, in the same way, that those labels could describe anyone in any relationship structure. But I don’t think those critiques fit across the board. I’d guess that many people would still choose to engage in serial monogamy even if they were magically “fixed” to the standard of the people shaming them. 

The issue with serial monogamy isn’t that they prefer short-term relationships or that they have many partners over the course of their lives. I’d argue that the problem arises from stigma. Because most people can’t identify as “serial monogamists” without being judged or shamed, it’s difficult for them to be realistic about their relationship preferences and set accurate expectations for their partners. Since most people can’t tell the people they date that they prefer short-lived connections, they choose to omit this information which can have disastrous consequences for partners who feel blind-sided when they assumed they would be together forever. The way I see it, this isn’t a problem with the structure so much as it is a disclosure issue. 

Changing labels: from serial monogamy to sequential polyamory

I don’t love splitting ends over terminology, but in the case of serial monogamy, I think some reframing can be particularly helpful. Instead of using the label “serial monogamy,” I like the concept of “sequential polyamory.” As we know, 

polyamory means that people love many folks

. Sequential polyamory differentiates people who have many lovers, one at a time, over the course of their lives from those who have multiple partners at once, like in traditional polyamory. I’m going to use the term sequential polyamory moving forward so we can examine this structure from an ENM perspective instead. Doing this will hopefully allow us to construct a new framework for people who would like to practice this structure. 

Sequential polyamory isn’t a typical structure discussed in ENM spaces because it’s still a faux pas to openly discuss deliberate breakups. While we can accept one-night stands or situationships, the grey area between casual and forever is still rarely discussed openly. We’re uncomfortable with the notion that we can have serious partnerships that we choose to end because it simply doesn’t fit our needs anymore. Most of us cringe at the idea that partners could willingly choose to end a partnership to benefit the people in it. We prefer stories of partners putting in hard grueling work, dragging themselves to couples counseling, to get their broken relationship back on track. Alternatively, we can accept the end of a relationship that’s marked with pain, betrayal, and conflict. But there’s something that seems to collectively rub us the wrong way with people calling it quits because they just don’t want to put in the work to save the partnership. 

We’re uncomfortable with the notion that we can have serious partnerships that we choose to end because it simply doesn’t fit our needs anymore.

I want us to be honest with each other, MANY relationships are better off ending. People tend to grow apart, lose enthusiasm, or become complacent over years or decades together. Purely maintaining a long-term relationship is a lot of work, but it’s even harder to keep it exciting and fun. Anyone who has experienced new relationship energy while having a long-term partner knows that it highlights the numerous small ways in which the older partnership naturally decreased in spontaneity over time. Not everyone wants to spend their life trying to “get the spark back.” Yet, many people feel stuck, obligated to stay because they committed forever. Now, for some couples putting in a little effort to sustain their partnership is worth it. For others, the comfort of predictability is worth the trade-off of being generally bored or unenthusiastic with their partners. Some people naturally settle into platonic domestic partnerships because romance or sex ceases to be a priority. I’m not discrediting any of these options. But I want to also permit people to choose to opt-out rather than dragging themselves and their partners through years of unwanted drudgery. 

Please don’t misconstrue what I’m saying 

I’m not suggesting that partners should abandon one another at the first sign of hardship. I also believe that people should honor the commitments they’ve made as often as reasonably possible. Calculating the relative impact that leaving would have on everyone involved is equally important. For example, if you’re raising kids with another person, you need to consider how breaking up will impact your ability to parent. Similarly, if your spouse has been financially dependent on you for years, you can’t overlook the material implications of leaving. But breaking up can be the most reasonable choice for a plethora of reasons, and we should encourage partners to openly discuss ending their partnerships from the onset. 

Knowing what conditions will make your partner move on can help you prepare for the relationship. For a lot of people, “forever” is better replaced with a specific time commitment and the option to terminate the relationship afterward. Suppose you intend to stay together to raise kids. In that case, it can be comforting to know that you have had a committed parenting relationship for 18ish years, but also recognize that you’ll have a renewed opportunity to explore other relationships after that. It’s helpful to remember that a relationship isn’t a failure because it ended, but rather a success for all the time it lasted while meeting everyone’s needs. Some breakup agreements aren’t formulated around a specific period but rather the conditions of the relationship. For example, some people would rather break up when their relationships become dusty rather than endure the slow disintegration. Or the breakup agreement could be more of a personal boundary, someone choosing to leave a partnership if they became solely responsible for the domestic labor because their partner refused to pull their weight. Regardless of the reason a relationship could end, talking about it when you start dating can create more realistic expectations than promising a nebulous “we’ll be together forever” or avoiding the conversation altogether. 

Some breakup agreements aren’t formulated around a specific period but rather the conditions of the relationship. For example, some people would rather break up when their relationships become dusty rather than endure the slow disintegration.

Currently, we mostly view breakups in a negative light. We often accept that breakups have to be the complete end of a connection. This all-or-nothing mindset can make it hard to decide to leave. It’s normal to fundamentally like the person you’re with even if the relationship is no longer serving your needs. It can be hard to imagine a world without that person in it. Plus, there are also many arbitrary rules around staying friends with exes. But as long as we hold on to this breakup narrative, we force people to stay unhappily together out of fear of losing each other. 

I’m not going to sit here and pretend that breakups are always fun and light. They’re not. It’s normal for there to be a level of heartache. But that doesn’t mean that after a cool-off period, you can’t transition into a different type of relationship or even 

, Kathy Labriola discusses the relationship restructuring process. Even if you don’t want to remain in the same role for one another, it doesn’t mean there’s no potential together. Plenty of people (lesbians) have friend groups composed of an intricate network of exes. Sometimes the best way for a relationship to survive is for people to decide to quit being romantic partners in favor of being friends, domestic partners, co-parents, coworkers, or whatever else. Just because you’ve dated someone doesn’t mean that you automatically have to remain in that role forever with that person, it’s okay to change the agreements and boundaries to meet your shifting needs. Of course, you do not need to stay in touch with everyone you date. Nor is restructuring a relationship possible in every scenario. Sometimes a breakup is just a breakup, it’s okay too if an ending is simply painful, messy, or a relief. But it’s worth weighing options so you don’t end up throwing good people out of your life just because the type of relationship you’re in doesn’t work. 

If you’ve been branded a “serial monogamist” because people notice a preference in the length of your relationships, it can be nice to give the people you’re interested in a heads-up. Maybe you notice that you really enjoy being in love but around year three, you’d consistently rather jump ship. Compulsory monogamy insists that bailing on partners when the relationship is no longer appealing is a sign of being a broken person, but what if that’s just your sweet spot? It might be true that despite your best efforts, you notice it becomes harder to give a fuck once the monotony of a long-term partnership starts to set in. It’s not kinder to stay with a person that you’re only giving 50% to, simply because you feel obligated to stay. There’s a good chance that you can end or change the relationship more smoothly by being honest and moving on. 

I strongly believe that there’s no single relationship structure that fits everyone, so whether you think sequential polyamory will work is an entirely individual choice based on preference. But if you’re someone who generally prefers to:

Relate romantically/sexually to one person at a time

Find a new partner rather than fix/maintain an existing relationship

Have a variety of romantic/sexual connections throughout your life

Then sequential polyamory might be a good fit for you. But as with all forms of ethical non-monogamy, it’s really easy to behave irresponsibly and hurt a lot of people. So I recommend that people who wish to practice this style of partnership take time to understand their motives, set clear boundaries and expectations for themselves and their partners, and read up on topics about alternative ways of breaking up. Naturally, no relationship will ever be perfect, but the more you practice talking about alternative options, the easier it gets.