Queering Attachment Theory
For years, hegemonic views of heterosexuality and mononormativity have shaped how we understand human attachment, attachment science, and couples therapy. Embedded within many early attachment frameworks was the assumption that secure attachment in romantic relationships development primarily through a singular, exclusive romantic bond—most often imagined as occurring between a man and a woman. Relationship security was often explicitly linked to emotional and sexual exclusivity, and relationship distress conceptualized through implicitly gendered dynamics such as the emotionally “withdrawing” man and the emotionally “pursuing” woman.
To some degree, these stereotypical relational positions reflect the impact of broader gender socialization. Many cis-men are socialized within systems of toxic masculinity that discourage emotional awareness, vulnerability, and dependency needs, causing emotional withdrawal in response to relational distress. On the other hand, people socialized as women are often granted greater permission for emotional expression and relational dependency, often then utilizing pursuing behaviors—moving towards their withdrawing partner—to soothe relational disconnection.
Yet when attachment theory is filtered through a heterosexual and cis-normative lens without discernment and attention to human diversity, it narrows our understanding of the many ways attachment behaviors, relational distress, and attachment panic can manifest across relationships—particularly those outside hetero- and mononormative frameworks. Critically, it also risks overlooking the profound impact that minority stress, marginalization, and systemic oppression can have on attachment security within queer relationships, shaping how safety, trust, vulnerability, and emotional responsiveness are experienced within these relationships.
__
As queer, trans, and consensually non-monogamous (CNM) communities have long demonstrated, secure attachment is not dependent on gender complementarity, dyadic exclusivity, or adherence to conventional relationship structures. For many LGBTQ+ and CMN individuals, attachment security may be cultivated through chosen family, queer platonic relationships, community networks, or multiple romantic and/or sexual partners. And research increasingly supports what many queer and CNM people have already known through lived experience: humans are capable of forming multiple meaningful, secure attachment bonds, and relational security can emerge in a wide variety of relational configurations. Attachment security is less about the number or gender of partners and more about the consistent presence of responsiveness, emotional accessibility, trust, and co-created safety within relationships.
Queering attachment theory requires us to interrogate the assumptions built into dominant relationship models and consider how attachment needs are expressed, negotiated, and fulfilled outside heteronormative and mononormative frameworks. Rather than viewing queerness, CNM, or polyamory as deviations from a presumed relational norm, a queer-inclusive attachment lens recognizes relational diversity as part of the natural variability of human bonding. It allows us to understand attachment patterns based on the dynamics actually unfolding in front of us, rather than through rigid assumptions about what relationships are “supposed” to look like.
__
This shift has important implications for therapy, particularly within models such as Emotionally Focused Therapy. Traditional EFT conceptualizations centered the couple dyad as the primary attachment unit, often without fully accounting for consensual non-monogamy, queer relational experiences, or queer platonic relationships. In recent decades, however, EFT theorists and clinicians have expanded the model through research and clinical work with queer couples and polyamorous constellations. This has enriched and strengthened the theory by requiring greater precision in how we conceptualize attachment dynamics. As we define attachment positions through the emotional patterns and relational moves present within the system itself, rather than through preconceived gendered or mononormative expectations, therapy becomes more attuned and flexible—we become more adept at providing culturally-responsive care and capable of fostering deeper healing across a wide range of relational experiences.
EFT’s core emphasis on emotional responsiveness and secure bonding remains profoundly valuable, and queer and poly-inclusive adaptations challenge therapists to move beyond assumptions that security must be exclusive, hierarchical, or confined to two partners. Ultimately, queering attachment means shifting from asking whether queer or polyamorous relationships can fit within attachment theory to asking how attachment theory itself can continue evolving to more fully encompass the diversity and complexity of human connection.
______________________
References:
Edwards, C., Allan, R., Marzo, N., Wynfield, T., & Hicks, R. (2023). The use of emotionally focused therapy with polyamorous relationships. Family Process, 62(4), 1362–1376. https://doi-org.pitt.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/famp.12934
Edwards, C., Wittenborn, A. K., & Allan, R. (2025). Developing guidelines on EFT for same‐sex/gender relationships: Recommendations from a Delphi study. Family Process, 64(1), 1–23. https://doi-org.pitt.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/famp.13079
Edwards, C., Wittenborn, A. K., & Allan, R. (2025). “Be Open to All Those Ways That People Can Live Their Lives:” LGBTQ+ Client Recommendations for Adapting Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, 51(3), 1–14. https://doi-org.pitt.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/jmft.70037
Hayes, L., & Allan, R. (2024). EFT for Three: Working with Polyamorous Relationships. Family Journal, 32(3), 346–353. https://doi-org.pitt.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/10664807241231246
Katz, M., & Katz, E. (2022). Reconceptualizing Attachment Theory Through the Lens of Polyamory. Sexuality & Culture, 26(2), 792–809. https://doi-org.pitt.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s12119-021-09902-0