Autistic and Non-monogamous? The Research No One's Talking About...Yet

Janet Walsh-Adams is a neurodivergent PhD candidate at Deakin University, researching a pattern that many autistic people have noticed for years: autistic adults may be more likely to pursue consensual non-monogamy (CNM). We talk about what CNM is (and what it isn't) and how stigma — not the relationship style itself — often creates the biggest risks.

Janet shares personal context alongside early findings from her work, including how autism, ADHD, gender diversity, and LGBTQIA+ identity can overlap with relationship structures like CNM, polyamory, kink/BDSM, and relationship anarchy. We also dig into what clinicians still need to learn (and unlearn) about autistic intimacy, and what Janet hopes her research will change — especially when it comes to safety and autonomy.

Topics explored include:

• What consensual non-monogamy actually means (polyamory, monogamish, swinging, and more)
• Why autistic people are so often miscast as uninterested in intimacy and where myths like these come from
• Autism + ADHD overlap, AuDHD, sensation seeking, and more
• Gender diversity and LGBTQIA+ culture as key factors in relationship styles
• Which group reports higher infidelity — autistics or neurotypicals?
• Why breakups in non-monogamous relationships aren't "proof they don't work"

Watch this episode on YouTube.

Follow Janet on LinkedIn.

If you'd like to know more about topics discussed in this episode, check out:

"Sexuality, Gender, and Autism" by K. Cooke et al. (chapter in The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Disability edited by Gabriel Bennett and Emma Goodall)

Theme music: "Everything Feels New" by Evgeny Bardyuzha.

All episodes written and produced by Kristen Hovet.

Send in your questions or thoughts via audio or video recording for a chance to be featured on the show! Email your audio or video clips to otherautism@gmail.com through WeTransfer.

Buy me a coffee!

Buy The Other Autism merch. Use code FREESHIP for free shipping on orders over $75 USD!

The views, opinions, and experiences shared by guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the host or production team. The content is intended for informational purposes only and should not be taken as medical or professional advice. Please consult with a qualified healthcare provider before making any decisions related to your health, fitness, or wellness.

Transcript

Kristen Hovet (00:00)
Today I'm speaking with researcher and PhD candidate Janet Walsh Adams. But before I share our conversation, I'd like to give a huge thank you to the individual who goes by the name Number Theory for buying me five coffees and the individual who goes by the name Someone for buying me three coffees. Thank you both so much for your generous support for the show. And if you are also a listener who would like to support the show,

you can head on over to the show notes and there's a link there that says buy me a coffee. If you would like to support the show in non-monetary ways, please like the show, give a review if you haven't already, and what matters most to me is if you share it with a loved one. Super, super grateful for doing that. And with that, please say hello to my guest for today, Janet Walsh Adams.

Janet Walsh-Adams (00:49)
I'm Janet Walsh and I'm a PhD candidate at Deakin University's Healthy Autistic Life Lab, focusing on the fact that it appears that autistic people are more likely to pursue non-monogamous relationships. I'm also a career coach at GradWISE, supporting students and graduates with disabilities to pursue careers which honour their interests and qualifications. I myself am a late diagnosed AD... AuDHDer, I should say, with many years of experience in both monogamy and non-monogamy.

Kristen Hovet (01:15)
I know listeners will be super interested. What inspired you to study autism and consensual non-monogamy or CNM?

Janet Walsh-Adams (01:24)
So this is a bit autobiographical because my experience with autism and CNM hits on a lot of the themes you explore in your podcast and experiences within the community. My first husband and I were together from the age of 16, high school sweethearts, which has been mentioned as being somewhat common in the neurodivergent community. We either often find our long-term partner very young

or a bit later than the neurotypical average. Now, if I could find the reference that refers to the fact that women especially are likely to form these long-term relationships in teenage years, please somebody send that to me because I read that particular point once and I cannot find it to marry together that whole story. Although my husband did not have the tangible language for it at the time,

he revealed to me about 10 years in, after we were married, that he was gender fluid. And as he explored that identity, it became clear that when they were in what they would call girl mode, that receiving male attention was really affirming for her feminine identity.  I wanted her to feel proud and comfortable, but wasn't able to provide that masculine vibe. So and she was very active in online chat rooms and in-person events with lots of admirers, male admirers.

So perhaps out of self-preservation, I suggested that we open up so that she could have that need met without any secrets and feel better about herself. We grew up at a time when,  and in an area, where being trans was not something that people would disclose and they would hide that. And it had been a thing that my husband had hidden all of his life. I was the first person he came out to, so I wanted to help him to not feel ashamed of that and to blossom into that.

Through all that opening up and the social opportunities that came along with it, I was receiving some unexpected attention from women. And I suppose because you turn the light on in your head to be like, I'm open to, you know... When I'm in a long-term relationship and it's a monogamous one, you may be less aware of those prospects and interest, but yet that kind of light went on for me. And so I also explored that. And over time, my ex-husband and I

built our own respective constellations of relationships and we started to openly identify as polyamorous and introduce our partners to our families and that kind of thing. And at that time I didn't know I was neurodivergent, but I went to lots of CNM and kink events and I would notice that there was a real trend in the attendees, and I hate to stereotype, but at the events I was at, the amount of IT managers and creative types who were also fans of sci-fi and fantasy and British comedy with a Lego collection and an interest in some aspect of Japanese culture,

was very difficult to ignore and very relatable. And this is, of course, is not all autistic people, but a certain subset. And they were living their best life in the CNM and kink scene, it looked like. And then lockdown came along and in Melbourne, it was harsh. My sister was posting about all the quirky things that my AuDHD nephew was doing whilst he was attending online classes. And my partner, now my second husband, pointed out that I did those things too,

in a really loving way, as a positive trait. He really celebrated that, so it was easier for me to explore AuDHD as an identity. So I got my ADHD first, then autism diagnosis. I had the nightmare scenario of the psychologist refusing to give me an autism diagnosis, saying, you don't look autistic. So I went to one that specialized in adults, and immediately it was confirmed.

I jumped through all those hoops and started to want to contribute to the community. And I was doing my psychology honours at the time and so decided to focus on autistic sibling relationships because that was the data set that we kind of had to work with. Those findings were inconsequential, but my supervisor let me know that he'd applied for me to do a PhD scholarship at the time. Now, at that time, my first husband had been struggling with non-monogamy, both sharing me and his partner sharing him.

And about a month before my honours thesis was due, he suggested that we should separate. So after about 21 years together, that was devastating. But I also knew he was right. I had grown in ways to the point that I agreed that we weren't meant to be primary romantic partners anymore. And possibly my current husband having that accepting attitude towards the way that I naturally am was a big part of that. It had opened my eyes to the fact that I deserved that kind of acceptance.

But having the PhD offer was a positive spark in that kind of darkness and transition. I thought my supervisor would think my suggestion was too niche or trivial, but he absolutely pounced when I mentioned that I'd noticed this trend of very relatable people in the CNM and kink events and in the online forums I'd been frequenting. Our lab has a focus on autistic adult sexuality and relationships,

and was instrumental in some of the early research revealing the increased prevalence of gender and sexual diversity in the autistic community. Now, that's been for such a long time that some of that early research was not as affirming and didn't use the language that we enjoy now, but  the lab has really turned to having autistic voices and seeking consultation to make sure that it serves the community and is actually about topics that we're interested in, not medicalising us as much, which is important.

And it actually turned out that in some of the research, not about non-monogamy, just general relationships, autistic people were more likely to just, of their own volition, suggest, oh, I'm non-monogamous in the comments section wherever they could scatter it around. So it hadn't been explored empirically specifically, but there was a hint there that I could kind of lever off of. And that, combined with all the anecdotal accounts in the community, because in the support groups,

it's almost mentioned nonchalantly. People will say, I do this because of my neurotype or my partner has this neurotype. And it's so casual. I was surprised that nobody had actually looked into it. There might be some mentions in some qualitative work, but nothing, sadly, that is empirical and  peer reviewed and researched in that way. So I feel lucky and honoured and a sense of responsibility to represent the community really well.

I should say I'm currently monogamous, but very much have a lot of respect for the people in the community. I didn't come away from it going, oh, this is terrible and everyone should stop, or I had a bad time so everyone should stop. And actually one of my respondents said that it's not for everyone, but it's perfect for them. So people really do understand that there's not that dichotomy of like, non-monogamy is the way or monogamy is the way. It's about respecting that people have different choices and having the option to pursue those choices.

Kristen Hovet (08:03)
Awesome. Thank you. And I'm curious to know if you've noticed any patterns in terms of age group, like starting out in kind of like a first or second relationship or set of relationships in CNM and then moving away or then moving back at a certain age. Do you see that kind of pattern?

Janet Walsh-Adams (08:20)
Yeah, so one of the themes for autistic people might be a sense of later consolidation of identity. That could be because a lot of us mask so much throughout our life that we don't quite know who we are until we get to explore and really introspect.  Sometimes that might be that we don't introspect until we get a bit later or we get some life experience, we get out there, we do some social things,

which might be a bit later for us because of bullying or just because we are more like monotropic and more focused on interests than people sometimes. A lot of people will settle down in those long-term relationships, like I did and like others do, and then realize, I am attracted to genders I didn't even think about, or my partner is having an exploration that I wasn't aware of. Or even some people might, once they open up and go, I am social, ⁓ I...

am confident talking to people, I do like this but I didn't date anybody. And there might be this sense among some people who are like, oh, well it's super, you know, if having one partner is cool and acceptable, well, having multiple partners must mean I'm an absolute stud. And so there might be some people who are building a little harem or a little group of people to... that makes them feel good about the fact that they can be loved by many people and making up for lost time potentially.

As long as that's done in a respectful way and those people are treated as like individuals with their own autonomy and not just a collection of people to make a person feel good about themselves, then yeah, there's lots of reasons people might come to it later.

Kristen Hovet (09:55)
Makes sense for sure. And I guess one question that I should probably ask is if you could define CNM, like what it is, what it isn't. I think I know I have an idea. Obviously you have a really good idea, but some listeners might not.

Janet Walsh-Adams (10:10)
Well firstly I should say I use the word CNM or consensual non-monogamy. Another term for that is ethical non-monogamy. I use it in my research because that's the terminology that's been used in other research so it links together because sometimes the word non-monogamy can refer to non-consensual kinds of non-monogamy like cheating or infidelity and we have to be very specific in the research so that we have that distinction.

But generally in the community the term non-monogamy is preferred by advocates because they posit that, well, there's no ethical or consensual monogamy, so why should we have to define it as being like a special kind of non-monogamy? But because, unfortunately, there are different kinds that are conflated and some of them are maybe less desirable and kinds of non-monogamy that the community would not...

encourage. Yeah, I use that kind of older terminology in my work, but I really support the advocates preference for non-monogamy. And I'll often use that terminology just like verbally, you might hear me say it here as well. So the definition would be that any dynamic that... where all parties are aware of and consent to the idea that they or their partners might have additional partners that are emotionally intimate, physically intimate.

 Some people include platonic partnerships in their polycules because  some of us may not see the distinction between the hierarchies of different relationships as much. That can be a very autistic trait. Sometimes we actively  reject the idea of hierarchy and there's also a concept called nebular romanticism, which is the idea that neurodivergent people sometimes can't actually determine the difference of the feelings that they're getting when they're like, I appreciate this person.

But do I appreciate them on a romantic level or a physical level or just a platonic level? I'm not sure. I want their approval. What's that about? And sometimes it... we need it to play out and get some more context clues, like maybe kissing the person or something, before we start to figure out, no, it's platonic or, yes, more of that please. And it plays into that idea that we might want to group more people into what we would call our loving circle rather than just our platonic or other associate circles.

Obviously you've got more romantic relationships that would be polyamory.  You might have more kink dynamics where you've got different people that you play with, but you don't necessarily live with them, call them a nesting partner. You might have swinging relationships where the couple goes together to,  or separately, to be with other people. There is monogamish,  which was termed by Dan Savage, I believe, king of queer podcasting. And so that's a kind of 

an idea that you've got a core couple, but that you might play a bit outside of that. Sometimes that dynamic is don't ask, don't tell, where you do or don't talk to your partner about the interactions that you have. Some people love talking about it. Some people say, I trust you, go, but I don't want to hear about it. What else do... there might be, oh, relationship anarchy that really feeds into that idea of rejecting hierarchy and saying all my acquaintances get the amount of attention that I feel like, regardless of

what their ranking is. And some might even reject the idea of ranking them or calling them a nesting partner or a secondary or a primary partner and things like that. So, there's lots of different ways to go about it. Some people are in  triads or quads or more where they're all interlaced and dating each other. And some, it might be that you have parallel relationships or different ways. Sometimes there's one partner who is non-monogamous and the other one is content to be monogamous and

let their partner explore because they've both got different desires and don't feel the need to just be matching each other  one for one, as it were. So, so many ways to go about it but, in the end, it's about all parties being aware of that and being comfortable with that.

Kristen Hovet (14:02)
Okay, so switching gears a little bit. So from what I've read so far of your work, there's this consistent thread pushing back on the idea that autistic people are uninterested in intimacy or somehow incapable of complex relationships, which I find hilarious. Where do you think these myths come from? And why have they been so persistent?

Janet Walsh-Adams (14:22)
 I think it comes from the historic tendency to identify autistic people by observation, particularly by what was inconvenient or uncomfortable for the people around the autistic person. And since humans on the whole are socially motivated, those who have a tendency to be less socially normative were more likely to be identified as being abhorrent and were grouped together under this banner of autism. And as you and your guests have so beautifully covered on your podcast,

those of us who are less likely to display those traits were less likely to be placed into that group back in the day. And I do believe it is true that we do have social differences such as our ways of performing and perceiving body language, text versus vocal communication,  more comfort with solitude, a tendency to connect with others on the basis of our interests. But I don't believe that those are inferior ways of being or that everyone should be expected to be socially motivated. But everybody matters.

Regardless, we should be taking care of each other. But the majority of us actually do desire companionship, intimacy, and acceptance. And the discrepancy happens when we can't get that despite the fact that we want it.  Partly that's because the social norms have a way of depicting the ideal kind of friendship and often that's multiple friendships, you know, a crew, you get together, you've got a routine, where some of us have more like solo friendships where we focus on one person.

And sometimes we have crescendos in those friendships where we very intensely focus on each other and then that might fall apart. Although those relationships are valuable, we don't get to maybe experience them the way that we're told they're meant to be. But the way that we go about having our needs met can mean that we receive frequent feedback that we're wrong, which can cause some of us to retreat, some of us to be ostracized, and some of us to mask and not be identified at all. That can result in us not being taught

or not getting an opportunity to learn, through experience, how to have comfortable reciprocal relationships, or being put into programs or just discipline at home, training us to be social in ways that are unnatural and exhausting for us. And some of us have, understandably, absorbed that message that we're broken when in fact we're just trying to work to a blueprint that is not designed for us. I'd say it is perpetuated by the fact that there are still infantilizing depictions in the media,

such as The Undateables or Love on the Spectrum. I absolutely champion the right for the participants to choose to be a part of those shows, but advocates argue that those programs failed to depict those participants as competent people with sexual desires and autonomy, and they play into historic stereotypes of what people believe all autism looks like. And it's underscored by music, which is also infantilizing and talking about interest and always referring back to...

neurotype rather than the other things that they like to do as being as important. Obviously I'm an identity first person and it's important but you can tell when they're laying it on thick to always remind the audience that this is the primary reason that we're looking at this person. So the fact that viewers talk about how cute and wholesome these shows are and the backlash against participants who demonstrate a desire for anything other than affection reflects a pervasive discomfort with autistic people as sexual beings,

which has been observed in the wider disability community. And in fact, when I advertised my study, which was widely embraced by many forums, they were keen to kind of learn this about themselves, there were some people who didn't want the investigation to proceed in case it revealed that CNM might be associated with autism,  in case that was bad for the image of the lifestyle. And I want to push back against that and say, well, what's wrong with autism? Uh,

we live among you, you might be one of us, embrace it. But, you know,  this kind of work  is a way to hopefully push back on that.

Kristen Hovet (18:14)
And your work does not frame non-monogamy as risk-taking or maladaptive, but as something that may actually fit certain autistic needs and values really well, which you've kind of spoken about already. So what else stood out to you when you started looking at CNM through that lens?

Janet Walsh-Adams (18:30)
So there is some potential risk to all relationship styles and, without societal modelling and non-judgmental support and myths about all CNMers being voracious sex-hungry nymphomaniacs, there is a risk of us getting into difficult situations, especially as some of us are sensation-seeking or dopamine-driven or expect that others have the best of intentions because we often have the best of intentions. And sometimes that means pursuing or staying in dynamics that aren't in our best interests

or jumping in without taking caution to protect ourselves or others.  But that happens in both non-monogamy and monogamy and people of all neurotypes. The difference is that there's more of a safety net for those who are monogamous, a societal understanding of what behaviours are right and wrong, and a network of friends, family, and therapists who understand how to support people in difficult monogamous situations, but less of that for people who are hiding their identity and their partnerships.

But those who practice consensual or ethical styles of non-monogamy strive to overcome those risks by providing information and support to bridge that gap. And when you have that framework, you can then open up a world of options that will suit different people's needs and preferences, because we are very individual. That's probably the difference is that maybe monogamous and or neurotypical people are comfortable with a fairly prescribed way of doing things, whereas we seek specificity and comfort and a fit. And so non-monogamy can do that.

First is the social differences. Some of us prefer periods of solitude, prefer to live alone, or use text-based communication. We are more likely to be attracted to a wider range of genders, to be aro, ace, or demisexual or romantic. We have differences in libido sometimes. That could just be  innate or, sadly, we are more likely to experience anxiety and depression and that can lead to us taking medications which can have an overall positive effect but might affect...

the ways that our body works in sexual circumstances. And some of us might relate to, as I mentioned before, that history of intense friendships and building a friend group through our partners. And CNM could be a way to build a wider group of friends by having more of these intimate relationships. Sometimes we find that our partners are the safe person. We always seem to be able to live with them and communicate with them and divulge our true self to them. But friendships are always a little bit more tenuous. So by having more partners that we can relate to and have that deep connection to,

then we can kind of bridge out and have a safer kind of network of friends and family even. Now we might even have sensory differences which can lead to different sexual preferences  for touch or even kinks or other predilections which our partner might not be interested in. And another tendency was that identification period. So identifying later, we might realize that our needs have changed as we've grown and gotten older or we might realize that

our needs were never being met. We thought that we were fine and we were happy, but we learn about our neurotype or we learn about different people and the relationships they're in, and we realize that, oh, maybe I've... I'm committed to something that isn't quite right for me and not the fit. But in a traditional monogamous relationship, that might result in a belief that your partner is not your soulmate and you just throw the whole relationship in the bin. But non-monogamy obviously means that you can maintain those relationships if the core is beautiful and cherished and precious to you. And that might be

especially valuable for neurodivergent people who find that there are less people in the world that we can choose from who understand us and cherish us and relate to us and that we're safe with. So, we maybe value each individual a bit more because that connection is something that's a little unusual for us sometimes.  And that hierarchy point that we talked about before, often a social justice value of like everyone's important,

I'm not going to devalue anybody or kick anybody out of my potential love circle because they are, you know, the second person I met or we have a sexual connection rather than an emotional connection or it's very customizable basically.

Kristen Hovet (22:27)
Awesome. Thank you. And actually, just as you were talking, I'm curious about percentages that you found so far. Like how common is this?

Janet Walsh-Adams (22:35)
The research is sadly unreliable because this is such a stigmatized lifestyle. It is difficult to pin down the amounts, but they say approximately one in four about have experienced some form of consensual non-monogamy. Now that can be skewed by the idea... we now have a range of people who are co-opting the language of non-monogamy to achieve more short-term hookups and,

while that is a valid way of being non-monogamous, sometimes those people don't have an intention of nurturing those relationships in the way that  a person who really lives the lifestyle and reads the resources might be hoping that their partners were on board with. So that can be damaging and isolating for those people.  But what we do know is that across religions, genders, countries, education levels,  people are being non-monogamous consensually.

However, it tends to be people who are more educated, living in more liberal areas. Everybody thinks of Portland in America. There are people, even like there's a thriving culture in Melbourne, for instance, where I am. It's underground, but it's there. The important thing is that it's accepted so that people can live comfortably wherever they are and whatever the culture they're in.

But yeah, it's universal and much more prevalent than I think people will admit to, for sure.

Kristen Hovet (24:04)
Right. And is that number one and four, is that for like the general population or is that neurodivergent folks?

Janet Walsh-Adams (24:10)
Sadly, I'm the first person to explore this for neurodivergent folks and my subset of 423 people is definitely not universally representative of the world. It was 50-50 neurodivergent to neurotypical. The majority of the people had practiced non-monogamy, so this is not so much representative of prevalence worldwide, it's just about the likelihood for autistic people to be doing that in a sample of people who are in those communities.

So we did have monogamous people in that group who'd never had experience of non-monogamy, but predominantly the study became very popular amongst people who were non-monogamous. So it would be difficult to project figures based on what I found in my study, and I'm the only person. So I encourage any other researchers to make this bigger, ask more questions. In therapy rooms, people could be doing clinical research to really nut out how prevalent this is for neurodivergent folks.

Kristen Hovet (25:09)
And one thing I found really striking, reading through your work, is how often explicit communication comes up. So both as something autistic people tend to prefer and as something CNM communities actively encourage. So first of all, can you define explicit communication? And secondly, from your work, what seems to be reflected in that preference?

Janet Walsh-Adams (25:30)
Explicit communication encompasses that tendency for autistic people to be more direct, saying what we mean. Sometimes that will be maligned as being unfiltered. And sometimes we ask for clarity as well, which people find inconvenient that we want to understand the situation.  And that's a generalization because many of us who are high masking know all about how we dance around what we mean for the comfort of others. But at our core, even we prefer authenticity and honesty usually, and we want other people to

know what we mean and to be able to predict what we're going to do. In relationships that can manifest as an expectation of mind reading. So a partner is deemed to be superior and better for us if they just know exactly what we need and we don't have to tell them, it's so romantic that they just, you know, knew that we wanted a bunch of flowers on that day or whatever. And especially in monogamy, people expect that you should know what to do because it's the norm, it's in the culture. Some of those norms are not

helpful, though, because we talk about things like being persistent in rom-coms, you know, if you just show up at the right place at the right time you'll change their mind. And that can be damaging for people as a model of how to secure a monogamous relationship. But because there are so many ways to do non-monogamy and more potential for situations that invoke jealousy, it's necessary to understand your own motivations and communicate your needs clearly,

and it's common to chat to your partner about your boundaries and desires. There are different levels of understanding in the community about how much you should be communicating boundaries to other people and that they should be personal boundaries, not that you should be trying to control another person's actions.  But yeah, sometimes that kind of chat can lead to that dynamic like don't ask, don't tell, where you agree to trust and return to each other without discussing every encounter.

And sometimes it's discussing every emotion when your partner goes on a date and you're not feeling great, and reflecting on, is that something about me that makes me worry that this person is not going to return to me or they're going to replace me?  Which is kind of the opposite of what non-monogamy is about. It's about adding loves, not replacing loves, generally. And that's very similar to the kink BDSM community where scenes and limits and desires are negotiated very clearly

and revisited to ensure the continued comfort of everyone involved. It's not just established and it's like, yep, that's the scene, off we go, you don't get to change the rules. And there's some research that indicates that practicing that style of communication has positive effects beyond that specific circumstance for people with disabilities. It can report your feeling of self-advocacy across workplaces and family and other scenarios because you get to practice asking for what you want and having somebody say, yes, that's valid and I honour it and...

That can also, we believe, apply to CNM, where you get to structure a life that suits you, in negotiating with other people, teaches you to respect that they might have different needs, but that your needs are valid, and that you can come to an agreement, and it doesn't have to be a confrontation every time. I think a lot of us fear confrontation, or that our desires won't be met, so we just shut down and don't ask for what we need.

Kristen Hovet (28:45)
I'm wondering if you could speak to also the different overlaps between different types of neurodiversity. So autism, ADHD, when there's both of those things occurring at the same time, and then gender identity, as well as openness to non-monogamous relationship structures.

Janet Walsh-Adams (29:01)
I mean the prevalence of the overlap of ADHD and autism, it varies between, some say 20, some say up to 80%. And there's some research now that shows that the genetic underpinnings are very similar between both of those conditions and it might be the environmental or additional genetic factors that create those variations in how our

neurodivergence manifests, whether we lose executive function when we're stressed or whether we  just shut down and go nonverbal, or whether we get super excited  and act out in a way that people would look at a male ADHDer, for instance, in a school. But there are distinct ways that obviously ADHDers are known for, maybe, sometimes that more dopamine-driven kind of way of pursuing relationships.

And, in research, that has been criticized as being, oh, they're not committed and they're not paying attention and they always focus on the relationship breakdowns that these people experience. But they don't focus on the fact that these people are seeking connections and that it's beautiful that they want to meet and know these people and interact. And then the autistic need for routine and solitude, they'll focus on that as being bad. But non-monogamy can be a way to kind of galvanize that too.

The hard thing is when people maybe have both and they're not quite sure... the push-pull of relationships. The research we found is that people enjoyed non-monogamy more if they were diagnosed ADHDers. So autism, they enjoyed it about the same as non-autistic people. But yeah, enjoyment was really enhanced for people with diagnosed ADHD. And I suspect that that's because that person

both gets to have their natural tendency of sensation seeking and making connections and sexual release and all the fun things that you can get out of non-monogamy, but also that they're doing it in a way that is supported. They might have medication or other treatments or routines and ways to mean that their partners don't describe them as being inattentive or forgetting about them. They might have a better ability to

handle that elaborate Google calendar that a lot of non-monogamous people will relate to using to manage all their romantic entanglements. Yeah, there's something about that, that it really meets that kind of dopamine satisfaction side of them, but also that they're able to do it in a way that's successful and honours everybody in those relationships. They're not just going out and getting the sexual needs met.

Kristen Hovet (31:35)
Also, reading your work, I really appreciate that you don't frame leaving CNM as failure. And I think you mentioned that earlier from your own experience as well. And I think I like that because I've noticed this sense in just like the culture around me that the way people who are non-monogamous are spoken about, it's like, oooo, wait and see, their relationship will fail, ha ha. Like, that's kind of how it's treated sometimes.

So from your perspective, what can we learn from especially neurodivergent people who try non-conventional CNM relationships and decide it's not for them?

Janet Walsh-Adams (32:10)
I do believe even within the community you'll look around and notice, oh, people do break up, but then you probably talk about it more because you're in a contained environment where people are discussing the quality of relationships and sustaining them and maintaining them and how to. Partly that increased likelihood of relationship failure is because there isn't support networks for people to get advice outside of the CNM community. You can't go to any therapist and have them be competent in talking about non-monogamy.

 In fact, many therapists will make a person returning to monogamy a treatment goal even if that person hasn't declared that that is a thing that was distressing them or that they want to return to monogamy. They're just applying their norms and going, well, this is a non-normative and their life would just be easier if they did a thing that I'm comfortable with. But more therapists are obviously training up and... like the Australian Psychological Society, for instance, has seminars for people to learn about non-monogamy. But yes, those breakups do happen, but

there is a sense that you understand a bit more that, because they're maybe about meeting needs and negotiations and growth and change, you can understand that sometimes you learn from a relationship and it plays its course and then you move on. The ideal is that you transition from that relationship in a way that is respectful and not hostile and doesn't have fallout and isn't unnecessarily damaging to the people in it just because we have those like

deep down feelings of rejection. So that's the difference and that's the other place where support can come in, both in the groups where people can have some really supportive discussions about how to navigate breakups and whether a dynamic is working for you or if a partner has breached a boundary, because even in non-monogamy people can cheat or people can break agreements, and that can be disrespectful depending on the agreement and the kind of trust that people have put in that agreement being honoured. All in all,

yeah, it's ideal to not treat those breakups as a failure. They are an opportunity for growth and, I personally, as I said, devastating to break up with a person who had been my best friend for 21 years but also the right thing to do and it taught me a lot about what I needed and who was right for me for my next phase of life.

Kristen Hovet (34:31)
What do you think researchers and clinicians still most need to unlearn or learn about autistic adults and intimate relationships?

Janet Walsh-Adams (34:40)
So I think, even recently, there is still a preponderance of research where non-autistic partners of autistic people talk about the terrible experience of being a partner to an autistic person, and very much focus on that explicit communication theme of like, oh, they just blurt things out or they can't predict what I need. They shouldn't need to be so direct. They should know me.

And so support groups of these people, you know, discussing how terrible it is to know and love us.  And we want to turn to a form of research that understands that double empathy problem that's been talked about, where maybe one way of communicating isn't the superior way. We both need to learn how to communicate. And sometimes we need to realize that there's an incompatibility and we might not ever learn to naturally communicate in a way that's comfortable.

And if that's more prevalent and understanding in society and psychologists can support that, maybe people learn that earlier before they've got children and build a life and are just hoping they'll be able to change this person because, generally, it's the responsibility of the autistic person. And often in the research, it's an autistic man. So that stereotyped idea of what an autistic person does and how they communicate, it would be ideal that we understand that that's a natural and sometimes very adaptive way of communicating and to talk about

how that can be nurtured and supported in a relationship and encouraged. Also, there's that history of therapists wanting to make returning to monogamy a treatment goal. Obviously, if they could tease out whether the client is actually feeling distress about non-monogamy or is that the one part of their life that's keeping them going? Is that the thing that's sustaining them and meeting their social needs and getting the connection that they need? But it's other parts of their life that are still not working for them and they need to be focused on.

But also knowing how to tease out when it is time to break up. What behaviours are beyond our boundaries? When is jealousy too much and justified and when is jealousy something about an insecurity that we can work on and move through? Non-monogamy isn't for everyone. It's wonderful to try and people encourage people coming on and getting educated, but even after all that education and reading all the books,

one might learn that, oh, I've tried it and I believe in this for other people, but it doesn't work for me. And helping those people to transition away from non-monogamy, which might mean losing a constellation of friends that became quite dear to them and that they share values with. Understanding that even if they stay in non-monogamy, but they have a breakup, having an additional partner does not negate the pain of losing the cherished previous connection!

Yeah, there's a lot of people going, oh, you've just got a back up partner so that you can like, you know, flit around and have breakups. It's not about that. Each of those relationships is individually cherished. It's the whole point of being non-monogamous rather than having serial individual partners. So, yeah, understanding that this can be a way for people to seek social connection. And there's not as many books about, not as many movies about, ⁓ that sometime is still seen as very like, sexy and quirky and weird, but that...

I mean, historically, it has been the norm in a lot of cultures.  It's not, as I say, the only way, but it's a way. And, yeah,  encouraging that for people for whom it would be helpful would be ideal.

Kristen Hovet (38:14)
Definitely. I think the thing that stands out for me as a concern is the safety piece that you were mentioning earlier, just about what can therapists assist with in terms of like recognizing red flags, looking for green flags, you know, things like that. That seems to be something that is really needed. And that's probably speaking to my own bias and experiences of unsavory people.

Janet Walsh-Adams (38:40)
I can absolutely relate. I think, as I mentioned earlier, we often will read all the books and the resources because we like to know that we're doing it in the right way, not just because we want the pat on the head, gold star, yes you did non-monogamy right, but also that we want these relationships to be mutually respectful and enjoyable. We don't just want to show up and be transactional about it, but we are, sadly, more likely... the research shows that autistic people are more likely to

be coerced into behaviours and things that they don't like in all kinds of relationships. And we are more likely to sometimes try and meet some more surface level needs of a partner in the hopes that they will give us the eventual love and acceptance that we crave. We just sometimes, as we say in the media, it's depicted as, oh, do plan A, B, and C and then happiness results. And sometimes

it's just never going to happen and that kind of more transactional way of doing things can hurt us and can hurt others as well. So in my own study I did ask about coercion, whether people were more likely to acquiesce to a suggestion of non-monogamy in a relationship if, you know, they'd been with the partner for a long time and they didn't want to lose them. There were a few people who did admit that that was a factor for them, but a very small portion of the subset. So, it

does indicate that generally people, at least in the very engaged, resourced forums that tended to respond, feeling like they're doing this because they want to. But it would be important in research to cast a wider net to people who have experienced non-monogamy and maybe aren't active in forums and didn't have

that support or left and have more difficult memories of their time in non-monogamy because obviously mine is a subset that was very engaged and positive about non-monogamy, which has been observed in some research: of any groups that are a marginalized group, there can be a tendency to maybe reflect more positively on the experiences when researchers come knocking because it's confirmation of the fact that you're doing something that is positive and not

dangerous or harmful, but danger and harm does exist there. And  it's important that both we as individuals, as supporters, as friends, as family, and also therapists can help to tease out like, my partner did this and that's actually disrespectful, or my partner did this and I've misinterpreted it because if I did it, it would mean this. But yeah, I think being more understanding of the...

that the behaviours within non-monogamy are not as clear cut as in monogamy and that you... that there needs to be individualized understanding of like, has a boundary been negotiated? Has it been met, exceeded? Is the relationship damaged? Can we repair? Is this worth repairing? Has this person disrespected you?  So it does go back to a lot of those monogamous kind of ideas.

Kristen Hovet (41:45)
Yeah, and if we could now switch to talking about some of the highlights of your research.

Janet Walsh-Adams (41:50)
I was delighted to confirm that autistic people are more likely to pursue non-monogamy. We didn't specifically recruit for autistic people and our posters and advertisements, we had two types. One did mention neurodivergence and one didn't. And the one that was neutral was the one that took off. And we mentioned clearly on the poster all kinds of relationship types, not just non-monogamy.

The fact that that word was on the poster, I think, really took off in the groups that that resonated with, because that's not referred to as much in the research. We got our subset, but I understood that, because there's different ways of being autistic and it is, to some degree, diagnosed as levels, at least via the DSM, and people who have those higher support needs might not get as many social opportunities. That can be because their caregivers filter their opportunities to be things that they...

feel are more supportive for that person and sometimes they don't ask whether their client would be interested in going to a kink munch or a CNM catch-up or a polyam group, and  maybe the client also doesn't feel safe to disclose that they would be interested in those things. So instead of just saying above and below threshold for autism, because we did a screening tool in addition to asking people about whether they were diagnosed or identify,

because a lot of previous autism research only does screening tools or only includes people who are diagnosed and obviously all presentations are valid. But it's more objective obviously to be able to sort and especially to identify people who don't necessarily know that they're autistic, who do have the kind of traits that somebody who is autistic would relate to. So I divided the group into five quintiles.

The fourth quintile was people above the threshold for autistic diagnosis but with the lower range of autism-relevant scores. And the fifth quintile was people with the highest autism-relevant scores. And those people would be probably more likely to be classified as being maybe higher support needs based on the general trends in the research. And we did find that the group that had a significant attachment to non-monogamy was the fourth quintile, so people above the threshold,

but not in the highest group of autism scores. So those people are less likely to have other people arranging their social situations. A lot of these scoring tools include socializing as  one of the kind of sub-domains. And people who obviously might be getting a higher overall score may have put higher kind of social differences on their measures. And CNM is a very social activity, so it's going to be people who maybe are social-seeking,

maybe masking, sadly, but the kind of people who have a bit more autonomy over their social life who are more likely to be able to pursue CNM. And they were the ones who reported it most highly. But the thing that we noticed, and this is another thing that I predicted but was glad to see, is that gender and sex at birth are different concepts. And in autism research, it's starting to be understood that gender diversity is very prevalent, much more prevalent than in the kind of general population.

And so I first measured the likelihood of CNM experience against sex at birth. And then in this logistic regression model where you kind of load in different steps, in the latter, the final step, I took out sex at birth and replaced that with gender identity. And at that point, being autistic did not have a significant link to the practice of CNM and being non-binary had the highest likelihood.

So for autism, you were... basically had twice the odds of having had CNM experience, but non-binary identity had four times higher odds compared to cisgender identity of having had CNM experience.  So then that's my first paper that is with the journals, hopefully ready to be published soon. My second paper then expands on the idea of like, well, if gender identity is a factor, maybe

wider kind of LGBTQIA plus culture could also be a factor. And we did find that that was the case. So we found that where there are increased odds of autistic people practicing certain relationship types, particularly long distance relationships, kink BDSM, CNM, polyamory, and relationship anarchy, that usually becomes non-significant when LGBTQIA plus status is included. Interestingly,

there is an understanding that a lot of CNM culture arose from gay culture, gay men cruising, that kind of thing. However, gay status was not that significant in our groups. It was usually gender identity and bisexual orientation that tended to be the thing that was more likely to be linked to this. And that does bear out with those couples who open up because one of the partners has gender attractions that they didn't get to explore or still would like to explore.

And of course, exploring gender in dynamics where you want to be with a kind of person who has a physicality that is not your partner's. So, yeah, that kind of bears out with the research. And more interestingly to me, the same group that noted that they were more likely to have CNM experience were also less likely to have experience of infidelity. So that fourth quintile group of people above the threshold but not the highest scores, they're kind of

interest in CNM seems to correlate to a reticence towards cheating and infidelity, and that kind of speaks back to that explicit communication and being authentic and having values about being kind of honorable and honest. More than that, the willingness to have really complicated conversations, empathetic conversations, that take into account different viewpoints and

asking for permission instead of seeking forgiveness, that, I think, is honourable and lovely and something that we want to highlight. It really demonstrates that this group, not what we used to categorize autistic people as. They have empathy, they are having difficult conversations, they are having many loves and seeking social interactions and physical interactions, and living really lovely, self-fulfilling lives.

Kristen Hovet (48:21)
Cool. There needs to be a reality show featuring autistic people in these relationships, I think. That'd be so awesome.

Janet Walsh-Adams (48:28)
Yeah, if we could have one that just shows here's all the kinds of autistic people in the world, here's the ways they do relationships. Some of them are very innocent and don't... you know, have a certain viewpoint. And some of them also have wonderful attitudes to other people, but like to do really sexy stuff. And they're both valid and they're both great. And you can get those two people in a room and they will be really excited about each other's experiences without having to necessarily agree about the way to go about things.

So yeah, I think showing the breadth of these experiences and that polyamorous love can be just as pure and lovely and exciting as meeting your first only monogamous love and compersion, as well, depicting the joy of seeing your partner thrive and having their needs met, is a term within non-monogamy that would be lovely for all of us to really celebrate that sometimes our partner will

meet a friend even in a monogamous situation, they'll make a connection that isn't with us. And some people might find that threatening, that, ⁓ my monogamous partner is getting excited about meeting this person, and it's not me. And realizing that the rising tide raises all boats, that if your partner is happy, they usually come back with great energy, and then it's only good for your relationship, whether it's monogamous or non-monogamous.

Kristen Hovet (49:48)
What's next in your research?

Janet Walsh-Adams (49:51)
I am very interested in qualitative research. To this point, and my supervisor is a writing math textbooks level of math professor, he is very into the statistics.  But I find that most of the revelations about autism have come from qualitative research, about asking autistic people about their lives and experiences. So I've

done some of the kind of groundwork to establish, yes, the numbers show that this is relevant for autistic people. And I'm very much looking forward to, and I have stopped myself... I have kept the data at arm's length and tried not to read it too much, because it's very interesting to me. And then my treat at the end is to go through all this qualitative data about people's motivations and experiences, both the non-monogamous and the monogamous participants, autistic and non-autistic, and see what people are saying about

their experiences because it's not just about having had the experience. And I can speculate and, as we have earlier in this, we can speculate about the ideas about why people are drawn to this, but there's got to be some nuggets in there that we haven't even considered, that people might be experiencing, that would help clinicians and other people, if they see trends or if they're looking for red flags or green flags, to add that to their research and know that  this is how people are living successful romantic lives, be they non-monogamous or monogamous.

Kristen Hovet (51:17)
What are your ideal outcomes? Like if you could wave the magic wand, I love that question, and have ideal outcomes of your research, of your work, what would those be?

Janet Walsh-Adams (51:27)
The hard thing is that there is still that idea that autistic people are weird and non-monogamy is weird.  There is the risk that some people lever onto that and go, oh, it's all weird, too much. Alternatively, people could look at that and go, we want autistic people to thrive. Autistic people are more likely to do this thing that I don't know much about, but it suits their needs. I should learn more about how that works for them.

As a clinician, I should make sure that I include this in my practice and that I'm open and curious about people's experiences and that I work to make sure that their outcome is the focus of our treatment. And that people can talk to their parents and their friends and their family about celebrating their partners because there is a history of people hiding their non-monogamous partners

and not being able to celebrate them. And being a hidden person is not great for one's self-esteem and self-actualization. So being able to celebrate openly: I have these partners, they are all valid and equal. It's very different from the reality. I was going to go to Seattle to present my research last year and I had to cancel at the last minute because it coincided with researchers being stopped at the border and not let in,

because they were open to queer topics and subversive topics. And at the same time, the administration was talking about autism being, you know, this... continuing the threat of vaccines and abhorrence and all the outdated ways of thinking about it. So yeah, I had to cancel that. So in an ideal world, I could go to another country and talk to  people about this and then being curious about those other groups, even if it's not their group. Just like

everybody supporting each other and being interested and curious about how each person is meeting their needs, and it doesn't necessarily have to be the same for all of us, but all of us being happy... it's ideal. It's not a reflection on me if somebody else chooses a different way of being, as long as they respect my way of being and vice versa.

Kristen Hovet (53:34)
I love that. Thank you.

Janet Walsh-Adams (53:35)
Thank you so much, Kristen.

Kristen Hovet (53:37)
Well, that's all I have for you today. Thank you so much for being here. Until next time, bye.