In a word, no.
Ethical Non-Monogamy may not be mainstream. It may challenge what you know, think, or even believe about relationships. But it is not the latest trend in modern love. It is not a social experiment pulled from nowhere, nor a fleeting cultural moment and certainly not a TikTok trend. Ethical Non-Monogamy has been part of human relationships for centuries. It has existed for as long as humans have married, and prior to that for far longer as a relationship dynamic.
So what’s new?
What is new is the label and the fact that people are now talking about it more openly. Today’s ENM is not a radical reinvention of intimacy. It is an old, intrinsic human behaviour, now layered with modern values such as consent, communication, honesty and the freedom to explore more openly.
What is monogamy?
That said, even the terminology itself is worth examining. Ethical Non-Monogamy, sometimes called Consensual Non-Monogamy, can be seen as a misnomer depending on how we define “monogamy” in the first place. Monogamy is generally taken to mean “the practice or state of having a sexual relationship with only one partner at a time”, according to the Oxford Dictionary. This is a modern, implied definition that most of us accept without question. Marriage in any form that we can recognise is no older than about 4,400 years – not even a blink in the eye of human history.
The word itself comes from the Greek “monos”, meaning one, and “gamos”, meaning marriage. When viewed through that lens, monogamy is about marriage structure rather than sexual exclusivity. This becomes clearer when we consider the term “polygamy”, which literally means one person married to multiple spouses. Yet we do not automatically assume those marriages include intimacy any more than a monogamous one does. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t.
In New Zealand law, a person can only be married to one partner at a time. From a strictly legal standpoint, that makes ethical non-monogamy within a legal marriage a misnomer. Outside the legal framework, however, society routinely uses the word “monogamous” to describe unmarried couples who are sexually exclusive. In reality, what they often mean is “sexually singular” or “exclusive”, not monogamous in the literal sense, but that is splitting hairs!
If we want to tie ourselves in further knots, we could even argue that someone who moves from one exclusive relationship to another, or who frequently changes partners, is a “serial monogamist” under the modern definition. It is technically accurate, yet rarely said aloud.
How does ‘ethical’ come into it?
The word that truly matters in Ethical Non-Monogamy is “ethical”. Honesty, consideration for others, fairness and respect. It is this element that separates ENM from deception and betrayal. Without ethics, openness is meaningless.
For us, monogamy is our legal status. It is a conscious choice, entered into willingly and with serious consideration. It provides structure, legal protection, and responsibility within the society and system we live in, and we respect it in these regards. It works for us. In truth, we do not have to work excessively hard at our relationship beyond being honest, putting the other person first, and remembering that we are individuals before we are a couple.
We describe our marriage as a balance of three elements: you, me, and us.
So are we monogamous? Legally, yes. In the way most people use the word, no. We prefer the word “primary”. We are first and foremost to each other, in every meaningful regard, just as in other successful marriages. The difference is that we are free from one implied constraint that quietly breaks countless relationships.
It all goes back a long way
History is filled with examples of open marriages and non-exclusive arrangements. Literature, film, and recorded accounts across cultures and centuries reflect this. The reasons are as varied as human nature itself. From political alliances to power dynamics, from pragmatic solutions to expressions of personal freedom, ethical non-monogamy has always existed even in cultures and times where breaking marriage vows could have serious consequences.
It has often appeared more visibly among social elites, possibly because their lives were more likely to be documented, but it is not confined to any one culture, class, or country. Many societies have, and still do, practise forms of marriage and partnership that are not sexually exclusive. It is notably a trait of many living foraging or hunter-gatherer communities and often cited as evidence of how we used to live by anthropologists in pre-agricultural times.
There is evidence suggesting ENM is becoming more visible in liberal societies, with some estimates placing it at around 4 to 5 percent of relationships, with far more people having experimented with it at some point. Whether this represents growth or simply greater openness to admit it, it is difficult to say. What is clear is that ENM has entered public conversation.
The past sometimes points to the future
In the mid-1980s, one of us sat around a bar table with friends in the UK when someone claimed that as many as 10 percent of men were gay. At the time, this felt shocking. Coming out required courage, particularly in suburban environments where hostility was usual. Few people admitted anything openly. Years later, several of those same individuals went on to live openly as gay or lesbian, while others chose lives without marriage, children, or sexual relationships at all.
Being ethically non-monogamous today, in some ways, mirrors that moment. It may not carry the same risks to personal safety, but it is still laden with stigma. And yet, it is not new. Some would argue it is deeply human, perhaps even our natural relational state before we shifted away from small, communal ways of living.
At its core, ENM is rooted in pragmatism. It recognises that expecting one person to meet every emotional, romantic, and intimate need for fifty years or more is unrealistic. Humans are capable of vast love and have innate need for variety and change. When intimacy is separated from love and viewed as a personal need rather than a moral obligation, it can be approached with honesty instead of shame.
Ethical Non-Monogamy is not a trend. It is not a rebellion. It is not a sign of psychological trauma by those who adopt it. It is just one of many ways humans have always navigated love, commitment, desire and the reality of being human.