EXPLORING SEXUAL EXCLUSIVITY AMONG INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF SAME-SEX, MALE COUPLES IN LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIPS by BRYAN R. CAMPBELL submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the subject PSYCHOLOGY at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA PROMOTER: PROFESSOR JUAN A. NEL February 2020 i DECLARATION Name: Bryan R. Campbell Student number: 58548793 Degree: PhD in Psychology Qualification code: 98555 I declare that Exploring Sexual Exclusivity Among Individual Members of Same-Sex, Male Couples in Long-Term Relationships is my work. The full extent of referenced sources have been provided. This work was not submitted previously toward any degree at any university. ______________________ __________________ Signed: Bryan R. Campbell Date: 9 February 2020 ii ABSTRACT Queer studies have not adequately considered gay men seeking sexual exclusivity within long- term relationships. In contrast, the emphasis has been on understanding evolving queer norms. Homonormativity has been informing sexual permissiveness. In accordance, and contrasting gay men seeking sexual exclusivity, gay, male couples tended to use relationship agreements to stipulate guidelines for extradyadic sex. This study was inspired by my inability—as a counsellor of gay men seeking sexual exclusivity—to provide them with credible insights to better understand their goals. Representing an initial step in generating practical knowledge, it was anticipated that my counselling clients could benefit from an exploration of lived experiences rather than having to rely on theoretical inferences and opinions. “How” and “why” participants maintained sexual exclusivity were the main targets of discovery. Eleven gay, Canadian men aged thirty-three and older, in relationships of five years or longer, participated in semi- structured interviews in-person or via video chat. Using Kleiman’s (2004) protocol for phenomenological analysis, common units of meaning were coded, from interview responses, so that distinct subthemes, contributing to six themes, were identified. These findings included content concerning “seeking positive affects,” “avoiding negative affects,” “factors supporting sexual exclusivity,” “threats to sexual exclusivity,” “rigidity in beliefs,” and “decision-making toward sexual exclusivity.” The first two themes integrated innately to form a meta-theme, “emotional optimization.” An essential insight into how participants maintained sexual exclusivity was their awareness of, and restraint in using, sexually tantalizing, visual stimuli, which was the primary risk to sexual exclusivity. Suggestions for gay men desiring sexual exclusivity included discontinued utility of pornography and cybersex. Varied implications for iii prospective research, clinical practice and support groups were delineated. Keywords: gay, sexual exclusivity, monogamy, long-term relationship, extradyadic sex, relationship agreement, phenomenological research method, existentialism, homonormativity iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS “It takes a community to raise a child.” It takes a team to produce a thesis. I am profoundly thankful for everyone who has supported and guided me in this remarkable learning experience. • Professor Juan Nel, your expert knowledge and exemplary patience were transformative. Always generous with gentle yet empowering guidance, if it were not for your belief in me, I would not be realizing my doctoral dream. I am eternally grateful for the time you invested in reading advancing iterations of my thesis. In saying I appreciate your commitment and attention to my written thoughts and interests is entirely inadequate. There is no doubt, you are among only a couple of people who provided me with that degree of mindfulness. At the age of forty-eight, you stand out as my best educational experience. • Dave and Donna, my loving brother and dearest friend, you were my grounded anchors, inspiring fortitude in moments of uncertainty. Eager with kind words and compassion, you never hesitated with your encouragement. • Professor Martin Terre Blanche, you were repeatedly available to help answer questions regarding administrative protocols and deadlines. Your speed of response and reliability were remarkable. • Completing this study with Professor Juan A. Nel could have been described as an advanced apprenticeship in research; however, this thesis was a gift in another, meaningful way. Part of my decision to engage in doctoral studies was so I could, with confidence and in good faith, implement an educational program for aspiring social service workers. Fortunately, what I discovered, somewhat by surprise, was a renewed v passion for the provision of psychotherapy. Research on relationships reawakened not only a sense of privilege, for counselling members of my community, but also, a regained respect for the crucial purpose of societies: the interconnected, interdependent endeavors of people helping each other satisfy needs so that we can, collectively, create environments in which we have freedom to strive to actualize our fullest potentials. vi (Hastings, 2015) Copyright Levi Hastings Used with permission. vii CONTENTS Declaration……………………………………………………………………….……........ i Abstract …………………………..………………..…….………………………...……..... ii Acknowledgements………………..…………………………….…………………………. iv The Anomalous Monogamous Gay Couple………………………………………………... vi Glossary………………..……………………………….………………………………..….x Chapter 1: Introduction and Orientation………………………………….……………...… 16 History of the Problem……………………………………….……….……………. 16 Contextualizing the Problem…………………………….…………….……...…….17 Aims of the Study……………………………………….……………....…….…… 19 Research Questions………………………………………………..……………….. 20 Rationale for the Study……………………………………………………..……… 21 Gay men without guidance…………………………………………...……. 22 Limited support from research…………………………………………..…. 24 In support of sexual exclusivity……………………………………..……... 25 Assumptions and Delimitations……………………………………………………. 28 Outline of the Study.………………………………………..……………………… 31 Chapter 2: Literature Review………………………………………….…………… ……....34 Introduction………………………………………………..……….………………. 34 Search Description…………………………….…………….……………….…..… 35 Theoretical Framework……………………………….……………....………….… 36 Existential theory…………………………………………………………... 36 Queer theory………………………………………………………...………38 Relationship Advisors Promoting Monogamy……………………..…………..… .. 40 Review of Existing Body of Knowledge………………………………….……..… 52 Effects of nature versus nurture on sexual exclusivity…………………….. 52 Masculinity and entitlement toward sexual freedom………………………. 57 Gay, male couples and extradyadic sex…………………………………..... 61 The norm of sexual non-exclusivity………………………………………...62 Savage influences…………………………………………………………...63 Factors espousing sexual exclusivity.……………………………………… 70 Affective dimensions of sexual exclusivity among gay men……….……....79 Observer as subject………………………………………………………… 81 Gay zeitgeist………………………………………………………………...83 Conclusions…………………..…………………………………………………….. 84 Chapter 3: Research Design…………………………………….…………………………..86 Introduction………………………………………………..……….………………. 86 Ethical Considerations…………………………….…………….…………….…… 88 Research Methodology………………………….……………...………………….. 91 Target Population……………………..……………………………………………. 94 Sexual orientation criteria………………………………………………….. 94 Age criterion……………………………………………………………….. 95 viii Individuals, not couples……………………………………………………. 96 Relationship span criteria…………………………………………………... 96 Sexual exclusivity inclusion criteria……………………………………….. 99 The close-proximity inclusion criterion……………………………………. 101 Sampling……………………………………………………………….……….….. 103 Data Collection…………………………………………………………………….. 105 Data Analysis………………………………………………………………….…… 108 Conclusions…………………….………………………………………….……..… 112 Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion…………………………………….…………………. 114 Introduction………………………………………………..……….……………….114 Demographic Summaries…………………………….……………………….…….117 James………………………………………………………………………..118 Tony………………………………………………………………………... 118 Dave………………………………………………………………………... 118 Samuel………………………………………………………………………118 John………………………………………………………………………… 118 Brent……………………………………………………………………….. 118 Fred………………………………………………………………….……... 119 Thomas…………………………………………………………………….. 119 Matthew……………………………………………………………………. 119 Morris………………………………………………………………………. 119 Edward……………………………………………………………………... 119 Themes Among Lived Experiences………………………………………………... 119 Seeking positive affects……………………………………..………………120 Avoiding negative affects……………………………………..…………… 139 Factors supporting sexual exclusivity……………………………………… 150 Threats to sexual exclusivity……………………………………………….. 159 Rigidity in beliefs…………….……………………………………………..162 Decision-making toward sexual exclusivity……………………………….. 171 Discussion……………………..…………………………………………………… 177 Theme-based analysis…………………………………..………………….. 178 Demographic impressions………………………………………………….. 210 Limitations…………………………………………………………………. 213 Conclusions……………………………………………….………………………... 217 Chapter 5: Summary and Suggestions…………………………………….……………….. 222 Answering the Research Questions………………………..………………………. 222 How did the participants maintain sexual exclusivity?.…………….……… 222 Why did participants maintain sexual exclusivity?.………………………...223 What factors supported and impeded the participants’ maintenance of sexual exclusivity?…………………………………..….. 224 What additional insights could be identified so that general knowledge can begin to develop regarding the subset of gay men who maintain sexual exclusivity in long-term relationships?…….…….... 224 Suggestions………….………………………………………………….………….. 225 ix References…………………………………………………………………..………