Ethical Non-Monogamy and BDSM: Polyamory, Open Relationships, and Power Exchange

Relationship Structures and Dynamics

Estimated reading time: 18 minutes

Reader promise: This article examines the significant overlap between BDSM communities and ethical non-monogamy, explores the different forms that non-monogamous relationship structures take, examines how Bondage, Discipline, Dominance, Submission, Sadism, and Masochism (BDSM) dynamics operate within polyamorous and open relationship contexts, and addresses the specific communication and consent requirements of multi-person BDSM dynamics.

Two Communities That Found Each Other

BDSM communities and ethical non-monogamy communities have long overlapped substantially, for reasons that become clear once you understand what both communities share: explicit consent culture, deliberate relationship design, the willing transgression of social norms around sexuality and intimacy, and the practice of having difficult conversations about desire rather than leaving them to assumption. Both communities developed, partly out of social necessity and partly out of genuine ethical commitment, practices of explicit negotiation and ongoing communication that the conventional relationship model rarely demands in comparable depth. The overlap was not accidental. It was the meeting of two populations who had each, for different reasons, already committed to doing relationships differently.

Defining Ethical Non-Monogamy

Ethical non-monogamy (ENM) is an umbrella term for relationship structures in which more than one person has intimate or sexual connections, with the full knowledge and consent of all involved. The word ethical is central: it distinguishes consensual non-monogamy from cheating, from situations where one partner does not know, and from arrangements that involve coercion or deception. Ethical non-monogamy encompasses several distinct relationship structures, each with its own internal logic, vocabulary, and community.

Polyamory describes the capacity for and practice of multiple simultaneous loving, intimate relationships, with the knowledge and consent of all involved. Polyamorous relationships vary enormously in structure: some are hierarchical, with a primary partner relationship taking precedence and secondary relationships defined by explicit agreements about time, priority, and entanglement; others are non-hierarchical, with multiple partners held with equal importance; others still are relationship anarchist, rejecting hierarchy altogether in favour of individually negotiated connections that resist categorisation.

Open relationships typically refer to a primary partnership that allows either or both partners to have additional sexual connections outside the relationship, with the primary partnership remaining primary in terms of commitment, priority, and domestic structure. The specific terms of what is and is not allowed vary considerably between couples and are defined by explicit agreement.

Relationship anarchy is a philosophical approach to relationships that rejects predetermined hierarchies, labels, and expectations, and treats each connection as its own negotiated arrangement without importing assumptions from conventional relationship scripts. Relationship anarchists may have multiple deep connections of various kinds without categorising them as primary or secondary, romantic or platonic, or sexual or non-sexual.

Swinging refers specifically to recreational sexual activity with other couples or individuals, typically without the ongoing emotional intimacy of polyamory, and often (though not always) practised as a couple activity rather than independently.

Why BDSM and ENM Overlap

The research on BDSM practitioners documents elevated rates of non-monogamous relationship structures compared with the general population. Richters, de Visser, Rissel, Grulich, and Smith (2008) found that BDSM practitioners were more likely to be in non-exclusive relationship arrangements than non-practitioners in the Australian national survey. Lecuona, Martinez-Barajas, Gimeno-Martin, and colleagues (2024) found higher openness to experience among BDSM practitioners, a personality trait associated with curiosity about and willingness to engage with unconventional relationship structures.

Beyond these statistical associations, there are specific structural reasons for the overlap. Both BDSM and ethical non-monogamy require the same fundamental practices: explicit communication about desire and limits, ongoing renegotiation as needs change, and the willingness to design relationships rather than simply inherit them from convention. A person who has already committed to the explicit consent culture of BDSM has already demonstrated the communication skills and the willingness to transgress social norms that ethical non-monogamy also requires. The practical skills transfer directly.

The BDSM community’s historically more inclusive culture has also made it a more welcoming space for people whose relationship structures are unconventional in other respects. A community that has built explicit frameworks for discussing sexual desires that mainstream culture does not acknowledge is better positioned to discuss relationship structures that mainstream culture does not endorse.

D/s Dynamics in Polyamorous Contexts

Dominance and submission (D/s) dynamics in polyamorous contexts take many forms, and the specific structure depends entirely on the negotiated agreements of the people involved. Several patterns are common in polyamorous BDSM practice.

A Dominant may have multiple submissives within their network, each with a distinct relationship and distinct negotiated dynamic. This structure requires the Dominant to manage their time, emotional labour, and attention across multiple relationships, and requires explicit agreements about how the submissives’ relationships with each other are handled, whether they know about each other, whether they interact, and what protocols govern the Dominant’s relationship with each. The potential for comparison, jealousy, and competition between submissives is a real dynamic that explicit agreement and honest communication must address.

A submissive may have a Dominant BDSM relationship alongside other relationships that do not involve D/s. The specific agreements between the Dominant and submissive need to be clear about whether the submissive’s non-BDSM relationships are within or outside the Dominant’s authority, what information the Dominant requires about other relationships, and whether the D/s dynamic extends into the submissive’s interactions with other partners. These are not simple questions, and their answers require explicit negotiation rather than assumption.

Kitchen table polyamory, where partners in a polyamorous network know, like, and interact comfortably with one another, intersects interestingly with BDSM community culture, where it is common to socialise with other practitioners across dynamics. For some polyamorous BDSM people, the community of their extended relationship network and the community of their BDSM practice overlap significantly, creating a social context in which intimate, D/s, and friendly connections all coexist and require careful management of roles and contexts.

Communication and Consent in Multi-Person BDSM

BDSM scenes or dynamics involving more than two people require multiplicatively more complex negotiation than two-person dynamics. The consent of all participants must be obtained for all activities. The specific relationships between participants, who has D/s authority over whom, how scene dynamics interact with relationship dynamics, and what each person’s limits are with respect to each other participant, must all be negotiated explicitly before the scene begins. Communication during multi-person scenes requires awareness that different participants may have different safewords, different signals, and different states that require different forms of monitoring and response.

Jealousy is a real emotional response that can arise in polyamorous BDSM contexts when a partner observes their Dominant or their submissive in an intensely connected scene with another person. This emotional response is not pathological and does not indicate that the relationship structure is wrong for the people involved: it is a natural response to witnessing intimacy that requires management through honest communication rather than suppression. Successful polyamorous BDSM practitioners develop explicit practices for processing jealousy: naming it, sharing it with the relevant partner, and using it as information about needs and agreements rather than as evidence of failure.

Myths and Misconceptions

Myth: Polyamory is just an excuse for infidelity.
Reality: Ethical non-monogamy is defined by the explicit consent and knowledge of all involved. Cheating, by definition, involves deception or violation of agreement. The difference between ethical non-monogamy and infidelity is precisely consent and honesty.
Myth: BDSM D/s dynamics are incompatible with polyamory.
Reality: D/s dynamics operate in polyamorous contexts routinely and with many different structural forms. The explicit communication culture of both BDSM and polyamory makes them more compatible, not less.
Myth: Polyamorous people cannot feel jealousy.
Reality: Jealousy is a natural emotional response that polyamorous people experience. The difference is in how it is managed: through communication, honest sharing, and using jealousy as information rather than suppressing or pathologising it.

Reader Reflection

Conventional monogamous relationships operate largely on an implicit social script: you are together, you are exclusive, and the specific terms of what that means are assumed rather than negotiated. Ethical non-monogamy requires making explicit what monogamy leaves implicit: what are we to each other? What do we owe each other? What are our specific agreements? These are, it turns out, questions that monogamous relationships would benefit from asking explicitly too, which is one of the reasons that some practitioners of ethical non-monogamy report that the communication practices it requires have improved not just their non-monogamous connections but all their relationships. Explicit relationship design is not a risk factor. It is a skill.

Practical Takeaways

BDSM and ethical non-monogamy communities overlap substantially, sharing explicit consent culture, deliberate relationship design, and willingness to transgress social norms around intimacy.
ENM encompasses polyamory, open relationships, relationship anarchy, and swinging, each with distinct structures and vocabularies.
D/s dynamics operate in polyamorous contexts in multiple forms, all requiring explicit negotiation of how the power exchange dynamic intersects with each person’s other relationships.
Multi-person BDSM requires multiplicatively complex negotiation. All participants must have explicitly negotiated consent for all activities, with clear agreements about roles and relationships.
Jealousy in polyamorous BDSM is managed through communication, not suppressed as a failure of the relationship model.

References

Dunkley, C.R. and Brotto, L.A. (2020). The role of consent in the context of BDSM. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 32(6), 657-678. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063219842847
Lecuona, O., Martinez-Barajas, O., Gimeno-Martin, A., Hernansaiz, A., Carrillo-Molina, C., Alcolea-Cantero, R., Rodriguez-Carvajal, R., and de Rivas, S. (2024). Not twisted, just kinky: Replication and structural invariance of attachment, personality, and well-being among BDSM practitioners. Journal of Homosexuality, 72(6), 1079-1108.
Richters, J., de Visser, R.O., Rissel, C.E., Grulich, A.E., and Smith, A.M.A. (2008). Demographic and psychosocial features of participants in bondage and discipline, “sadomasochism” or dominance and submission (BDSM): Data from a national survey. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5(7), 1660-1668.