Eine interessante Studie behandelt Vereinbarungen zur sexuellen Treue in schwulen Partnerschaften:
Many gay male couples make agreements about whether or not to permit sex with outside partners, yet little is known about the development and maintenance of these agreements, their impact on relationships, and whether they are an effective HIV prevention strategy. Using semi-structured, qualitative interviews, 39 gay male couples were asked about their sexual agreements and about other relationship dynamics that might affect their agreements. Analysis revealed a wide range of agreement types, all of which are presented along a continuum rather than as discrete categories. For couples with open agreements, most placed rules or conditions limiting when, where, how often, and with whom outside sex was permitted. Although motivations for having agreements varied, HIV prevention did not rank as a primary factor for any couple. Most couples had congruous agreements; however, a small number reported discrepancies which may increase HIV transmission risk. How couples handled breaks in their agreements also varied, depending on what condition was broken, whether it was disclosed, and the partner’s reaction. Additional results include differences in agreement type and motivations for having an agreement based on couple serostatus. Overall, agreements benefited couples by providing boundaries for the relationship, supporting a non-heteronormative identity, and fulfilling the sexual needs of the couple. Future prevention efforts involving gay couples must address the range of agreement types and the meanings couples ascribe to them, in addition to tempering safety messages with the relationship issues that are important to and faced by gay couples.
In der Zusammenfassung selbst steht noch nicht so viel interessantes, aber in dem Artikel selbst findet sich dies:
Closed Agreements Twelve couples (31%) described their agreement as closed or monogamous. For many of these couples, theirs was an agreement to be monogamous in the “classic sense.” That is, no sex with outside partners was allowed. It was not uncommon for these couples to associate feelings of love and commitment to their monogamous agreement when they described it. One participant stated, “We made a decision to only be with each other. And it’s because we love each other and care about each other deeply” (32/API/HIV−). It is important to understand, however, that closed agreements did not necessarily foreclose outside sexual encounters. On the contrary, a few couples who reported closed or monogamous agreements allowed some form of sex with outside partners.
Ich finde es wenig erstaunlich, dass in sexuellen Beziehungen von Männern ein „Fremdgehen“ weit weniger als Problem angesehen wird, weil dort eben beide üblicherweise einen starken Sexualtrieb und eine gewisse Vorliebe für casual sex mitbringen. Männer sind wohl häufiger in der Lage Sex und Gefühle zu trennen und ich könnte mir vorstellen, dass das auch noch eher der Fall ist, wenn Sex mit Fremden vergleichsweise einfach zu bekommen ist. Auf heterosexuelle Verhältnisse übertragen wäre eine Zahl von nur 31%, die davon ausgehen, dass man monogam (bei einem teilweise ausgeweiteten Verständnis von Monogamie) leben sollte kaum zu erwarten. Die wenigsten Frauen sind bereit ihren Mann mit anderen Frauen schlafen zu lassen, allerdings eben auch die wenigsten Männer, ihre Frauen mit anderen Männern schlafen zu lassen. Gleichzeitig zeigt eine hohe Zahl an Prostituierten, dass Männer sich durchaus zugestehen auf diese Weise die „Monogamie aufzulockern“. Hier wäre wohl zu berücksichtigen, dass Frauen ein gänzlich anderes Verhältnis zu Männern haben und gleichzeitig ihren Sex „teurer verkaufen“ können, also eher eine Beziehung davon abhängig machen können.
Open Agreements Twenty-five couples (64%) described agreements that, to varying degrees, allowed sex with outside partners. Most of those couples described agreements that were neither completely closed nor completely open, testifying to the overlap and fluidity of the different types of agreements reported by participants. What distinguished them, however, were the conditions couples placed on whether or not sex with outside partners was allowed and how those conditions limited sexual behavior. Two conditions emerged most frequently: opening up the relationship for threesomes and separating physical from emotional intimacy with outside sex partners.
Several couples described agreements that allowed threesomes. For most of these couples, sex with a third person was something they only did together and many of them made a point of qualifying it.
64% die bis zu einem gewissen Grad Fremdgehen erlauben, solange es eben nur um Sex geht bzw der andere dabei ist, da bin ich mir sicher, dass die Zahl in heterosexuellen Beziehungen eher im einstelligen Prozentbereich ist. Hier ist denke ich aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Natur von Mann und Frau eine geringere Verlustangst vorhanden. Warum soll er nicht Spass mit anderen haben, wenn die auch nur Spass suchen und keiner von beiden deswegen auf eine Beziehung aus ist? Wäre interessant, ob Frauen denken, dass ihr Mann auch schon mal bei einer Prostituierten gewesen ist und damit – abgesehen von Krankheiten – weit aus weniger Probleme haben, solange sie es nicht wissen müssen.
Hier noch etwas zur Motivation und zum Einhalten der Vereinbarungen:
Most couples were motivated to have agreements because it benefited their relationship. For example, trusting one’s partner to be monogamous or to be safe with outside sex partners deepened the emotional bonds couples shared. Agreements also provided boundaries, which supported couples in their knowledge of where they stood with each other. Those boundaries dealt not only with the couple relative to outside partners, they also extended into agreements about safety, supporting the idea that relationship dynamics are an important component of agreements (Davidovich, de Wit, & Stroebe, 2006). Finally, agreements helped couples prioritize different aspects of their relationship.
Broken agreements were relatively common and affected just over half (56%) of the couples who participated. This number comes in significantly above similar studies (Davidovich, de Wit, & Stroebe, 2000;Prestage et al., 2006) and may be due to the fact that both partners were interviewed and, as such, broken agreements were more likely to be reported. Disclosing broken agreements supported relationships by airing secrets and minimizing distance between partners. The process of renegotiating broken agreements gave participants the opportunity to revisit their needs and desires with their partners and gave couples an additional opportunity at making a clearer, more explicit agreement. However, consistent with other studies, there were several instances reported where partners were not informed of a broken agreement (Kippax et al., 2003; Prestage et al., 2006; Prestage et al., 2008). Those who did not disclose broken agreements reported emotional distance from their partner and, to a lesser extent, concern over their own and their partner’s health.
Sofern Vereinbarungen getroffen worden sind, kam es also auch recht häufig zu Brüchen dieser Vereinbarungen. Was auch wenig überrascht, wenn man wesentlich mehr Angebote hat als der typische heterosexuelle Mann aufgrund der beiderseitigen höheren Motivation zu Sex einfach so.
Es wäre interessant jetzt noch eine Studie zu haben, wie dies bei lesbischen Beziehungen so ist.
Ich kann da gegenwärtig nur auf die hier bereits zitierte Studie verweisen:
They found that gay men had higher frequencies of sex than lesbians at all stages of relationships. Within the first 2 years of a relationship, for example, two thirds of the gay men but only one third of the lesbians were in the maximum category of having sex three or more times per week (the highest frequency category). After 10 years together, 11% of the gay men but only 1% of the lesbians were still in that category of highly frequent sex. At the other extreme, after 10 years nearly half the lesbians, but only a third of the gay men, were having sex less than once a month. Even that difference may be a substantial underestimate of the discrepancy in sexual activity: Blumstein and Schwartz reported that the gay men who had largely ceased having sex after 10 years together were often having sex with other partners, whereas the lesbians who had ceased having sex together had generally not compensated for this deficit by finding other sexual outlets. A lack of sexual desire and activity in women is reflected in the phrase “lesbian bed death,” (e.g., Iasenza, 2000) which has been coined to describe the low levels of sexual activity among lesbians in long-term relationships. Similar conclusions emerged from an earlier study by Bell and Weinberg (1978), which did not limit its sample to people in committed relationships and is thus a useful complement to the Blumstein and Schwartz (1983) study. White homosexual men were more likely than lesbians (47% vs. 32%) to report having sex more than once per week. A similar difference was found among gay Blacks (65% vs. 56%) (…)
The subculture of gay men did briefly establish bathhouses and other institutions that allowed men to have sex with half a dozen or more partners in a single evening. Even though lesbians are better able than gay men to engage in such promiscuity (because of the lack of refractory period), lesbian communities do not seem to have created any market for such institutionalized orgiastic behavior. (…)
Blumstein and Schwartz (1983) found that, among people in committed relationships, gay men were far more likely than lesbians to have sex with someone other than their regular partner (82% vs. 28%). Among those who did experience sex with someone other than the partner, lesbians tended to have only 1 outside partner (53%), unlike gay men (7%). The proportion of gay men who reported having had over 20 outside partners during the relationship was substantial (43%), but among lesbians it was negligible (1%). Even in the moderately promiscuous category of having had between 6 and 20 partners, gay men outnumbered lesbians (30% vs. 4%). Again we look to Bell and Weinberg (1978) for converging evidence with a sample that was not restricted to people in committed relationships. In a sample of several hundred respondents, far more gay White men (43%) than White lesbians (0%) reported having had over 500 sex partners. Meanwhile, 58% of White lesbians, but only 3% of gay White men, said their lifetime homosexual experience had included 9 or fewer partners. (…)
Das würde zu den biologischen Grundlagen passen.