Lustful Yearnings

Hey {{ first_name | Neighbor }}. The results of our “Lustful Yearnings Survey" (below) suggest that romantic feelings outside long-term relationships are shaped far more by institutional and social allegiances than by physical attraction. The TL:DR? Oat Milk Elites fantasize about being with people living parallel lives, but reeeeally don’t want to piss off their partners.

➺ Additional Reading: If you want to learn more about this stuff, I’d suggest: The Transformation of Intimacy by Anthony Giddens, Cold Intimacies by Eva Illouz, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1 by Michel Foucault, Private Truths, Public Lies by Timur Kuran, and, of course, The Ice Storm by Rick Moody.

➺ Something to Think About: We want to want things our partners would also find appealing. The logic of that extends to wanting people that aren’t our partners.

Upper Middle’s “Lustful Yearnings” survey examined how Oat Milk Elites experience attraction, flirtation, and sexual satisfaction inside and outside of (ostensibly) monogamous relationships. The survey focused on what is attractive to monogamous professionals and what makes them mostly likely to act on that attraction – whether that’s flirting or engaging in the other gerund starting in “F.” The findings suggest that generalized horniness is far rarer than persistent romantic feelings¹, which are driven more by proximity than impulse. 

Predictability is desirable and desire is predictable.

The findings also suggest that geography, profession, and, to a lesser degree, income are predictive of both the intensity of romantic feelings and the likelihood to act on them.

PREDICTABILITY IS DESIRABLE

Among partnered respondents, attraction to others is common and persistent. Roughly one quarter of partnered respondents report being attracted to someone else often or very often (25.8%) and, more tellingly, one fifth of partnered respondents say they already know who they would pursue if their partner were out of the picture (21.7%).

Among partnered respondents who report being attracted to someone else, attraction most commonly arises in peer environments. Roughly one third report attraction developing through shared social networks such as friends-of-friends or recurring social groups² (30–35%), while professional environments like workplaces or industry contexts account for roughly another quarter (20–25%). By contrast, bars, nightlife, and explicitly sexualized settings account for a much smaller share (low-to-mid teens). Romantic feelings arise toward people living parallel lives, which is to say people with similar social status. This pattern aligns with Eva Illouz’s argument that modern romantic feeling is structured less by passion than by shared institutions.

The like-seeks-like nature of unrequited romantic feelings is underscored by the fact those feelings tend to contingent on shared attitudes. Four in five respondents report losing interest in someone after learning their education, politics, or profession (79.4%). This holds among partnered respondents (78.2%) and declines only modestly with wealth thanks to a small negative correlation between net worth and status filtering consistent with the libertinism of wealthier respondents.

Interestingly, attraction and flirtation are only weakly correlated (ρ = 0.269). Among partnered respondents, 9.1% report high attraction but say they never or rarely flirt, which… is weird but God bless. Being partnered remains the single strongest predictor of reported satisfaction (ρ = 0.298).

DESIRE IS PREDICTABLE

Across the sample, flirtation frequency, targeting behavior (knowing who you’d pursue if you lost your partner), and sexual satisfaction are more strongly correlated to profession and geography than to income or wealth. 

Respondents in variable-income or socially exposed roles – sales, business development, and creative/media work – report higher flirting frequency and are more likely to say they know who they would pursue if their partner were gone. This trend persist in the cheating data. Roughly one third report having ever cheated (32.3%), with higher rates concentrated in variable-income professions (chiefly sales) and lower rates in more structured professions. Geography compounds this effect. Respondents in structured, credential-driven professions – finance, accounting, IT, and medicine –reported lower flirting frequency, less cheating, and higher sexual satisfaction on average. 

Interestingly, partnered respondents in the South report the highest rates of having ever cheated (34.7%), compared with substantially lower rates in the Midwest (17.0%) and meaningfully lower rates in the Northeast and California (both +/-25%). From a behavioral standpoint, this supports Geoffrey Miller’s ideas about sexual signaling under asymmetric risk: Individuals expand behavior when the downside is acceptable even while maintaining conservative moral postures in order to protect long-term status.

The most desirous respondents, which is to say the respondents that had a specific romantic interest, flirted, and cheated, were not younger or poorer. They were married, male professionals with social, incentive-driven jobs operating out of the South, principally the Atlanta metro area. The least desirous respondents, on the other handed, tended to by queer women in the Northeast. Great news for the Subaru community.

SEX MATTERS (LESS THAN YOU’D THINK)

Sexual satisfaction is negatively correlated with outside desire, but the relationship is modest. Among partnered respondents, higher sexual satisfaction is associated with slightly lower desire frequency (ρ ≈ −0.18) and lower flirtation frequency (ρ ≈ −0.24). Cheating shows a similar but stronger pattern: more respondents with low sexual satisfaction reported cheating (ρ ≈ −0.27). That said, even respondents who describe their sex lives as “mostly” or “very” satisfying report being attracted to others at least occasionally, suggesting outside desire doesn’t necessarily signal dissatisfaction. 

People are just horny for each other.

Among partnered respondents, age is more strongly negatively correlated than sexual satisfaction to desire frequency (ρ ≈ −0.31), flirtation frequency (ρ ≈ −0.34), and cheating frequency (ρ ≈ −0.29). Of course, age affects sexual satisfaction, which tends to stabilize in the mid-30s (when people get married). Put succinctly, age reduces desire and sexual satisfaction reduces desire-driven behavior.

THE OPPOSITE OF HONESTY IS RISK

Promiscuity may be understood in moral terms, but it is driven far more consistently by perceptions of risk³. Only 14.4% of partnered respondents believe their partner would be understanding if they cheated. Within that group, cheating rates are meaningfully higher (38.8% vs. 31.2%), as is the likelihood of reporting a specific person they fantasize about (22.4% vs. 12.3%). Where fallout feels manageable—emotionally or socially—behavior follows. Where it does not, romantic feeling is more likely to be contained or rationalized away.

Consequence, however, is not just interpersonal; it is also financial. Respondents with higher incomes and greater professional insulation report more flirtation and higher lifetime cheating rates, even though income itself is only weakly correlated with sexual satisfaction. Roughly half (51%) of respondents report having had a “slutty period” at some point, with intensity increasing modestly with income (ρ = 0.128). Promiscuity, in other words, appears most common where the material and reputational costs of experimentation are perceived as survivable.

At the same time, higher-income respondents are more likely, not less, to hold negative views of polyamory (39.5% negative at high income vs. 28.9% at low income). This creates a revealing asymmetry. Discrete acts of non-monogamy – cheating, flirtation, episodic experimentation – are framed by highly self-actualized people as private deviations, while openly non-monogamous identities are treated as low-status. For those in the poly community, who tend to be lower income and coastal, lying and cheating are framed as low status. Interestingly, despite being contradictory, both of these worldviews leave space for romantic interest.

CONCLUSION

One easy way to read these findings would be to treat attraction outside monogamy as a story about sex. The data suggest something more interesting. Romantic feelings toward people who are not one’s partner are not primarily physical; they are primarily social. Unrequited romance is less about passion than about parallel lives. Crushes are not a form of escapism, but calibration. Respondents were on the lookout for people like them they liked who might like them. It’s almost a solution-orientation.

What was perhaps most striking about the survey results was the collective willingness to acknowledge romantic (and sexual) feelings outside a partnership. Even among people skeptical of polyamory with non-permissive partners attraction, fantasy, and flirtation were self-reported at reasonably high rates⁴, suggesting that romantic feelings – restrained, but not denied – are part of the background music of white-collar life.

[2] Lots of people have crushes on their friends partners. It seems that those desires lead to very little flirting and very little cheating – except among young people – which is nice.

[3] The data suggests that people with stable lives are often a bit sluttier because they can afford to be. Money and parents with stable marriages were both associated with general sluttiness.

[4] Hey. We’re all human.