Scroll through some dating app profiles these days, and “ENM” or “ethical non-monogamy” is just as prolific as “dog lover” and “looking for a travel buddy” as just one more attribute that you are expected to accept. How often it is a genuine descriptor rather than a hopeful entreaty I’m not sure. But the pitch underneath, once you strip away the physical yearnings, is about abundance. More partners means no single relationship has to carry all the weight.
I’ve written before about the moment someone admits that a single partner was never going to meet every need they had, and how a clinical sexologist framed non-monogamy as an honest response to that admission rather than a failure of the relationship:
“...no single person can carry someone’s entire emotional life alone, however well chosen they are. Ethical non-monogamy just makes that admission explicit, building agreements and check-ins around it instead of leaving it unspoken.”
I still think that’s true. There is great power and vulnerability in honestly naming your needs, but taking action and closing the gap is a whole other thing once you move past the base abundance pitch. Does having more intimate partners actually touch the loneliness underneath, or does it just spread the same unmet need across more people?
After reading through a bunch of research and articles and talking with friends, it is no; it does not, at least on its own. Structure is not what alleviates loneliness. No number of partners will change your relationship with yourself. Non-monogamy done well carries real logistical weight: shared Google calendars, negotiated time, check-ins that have to happen even when maybe some are low in energy. People in it often describe this stage, half-joking, as running a small business.
It’s a form of busyness that can masquerade as connection because your diary is full. But it doesn’t always leave space for the slower, less scheduled closeness that is needed to calm a nervous system. A week full of dates and commitments is not the same as a paced, regulated relationship.
No matter the relationship form, there is the commonly accepted idea of new relationship energy (NRE), that high that comes from a new intimate relationship - whether monogamous or not - and it’s easy to accept that as the salve rather than solving an underlying emotional need. If your loneliness has led to a pattern of protecting yourself against deeper connection to the point where you’d rather exit than dive deeper, loading up more partners to keep chasing the NRE is no different to a drug addict hunting for the next high. Your avoidance is just spread across multiple people instead of one, and the NRE novelty fades just as predictably, leaving you still unresolved.
Jessica Fern, the psychotherapist who wrote what many consider one of the ENM bibles, Polysecure, makes a version of this argument that runs counter to the abundance pitch rather than backing it, after years of clinical work across every relationship structure.
“You are the source of your happiness, love, courage, emotional regulation and purpose, and the sooner that you can release your partner from being the source of these experiences the better for everyone involved.”
That holds whether you have one partner or five. Outsourcing your sense of self to other people doesn’t get safer as the headcount rises. It gets harder to track, if anything, because there are now more people whose moods can register as a verdict on your worth.
I’m not arguing for non-monogamy either way; that’s up to individuals to decide. But if you’ve spent years feeling like the typical relationship-escalator script doesn’t sit well with you, finding a community that shares your values and vocabulary can be a real relief. Non-monogamy might solve an ache of not having one single bond that makes you feel fully secure, instead of living uneasily in a one-to-one couple.
Loneliness doesn’t care about your relationship status; it comes with you into whatever intimate relationship structure you choose, whether monogamous or otherwise. It’s up to you to do the work; your happiness is your responsibility, not that of those around you. You need to be someone who can stand on your own two feet. So change the structure; at least explore what possibilities exist; just don’t expect changing the headcount to solve a problem that is yours only.
DO YOURSELF A FAVOUR
That was Molly Meldrum’s line, and it still holds up. You’re reading Alone Rangers for free, that’s not changing. But a paid subscription keeps it free for everyone else and puts a few dollars behind work that’s trying to say something true about loneliness and connection.