Gather initial thoughts and broad opinions about the book.

1. Esther Perel’s central argument is that the security we seek in love can diminish the desire we crave. How did this idea sit with you at the start of the book, and did your perspective on it change by the end?

2. How does Mating in Captivity frame the conversation around modern relationships when compared to Perel’s later book, The State of Affairs (2017), or other relationship guides you’ve encountered?

3. What was the most provocative or surprising concept for you in the book? Why do you think it had such an impact on you?

Encourage readers to connect the book’s themes and characters with their personal experiences.

1. Perel uses the metaphor of the “anchor and the wave” to describe our competing needs for security and novelty (5). How does this tension manifest in different areas of your life, not just romantic ones?

2. Did the concept of “erotic blueprints” offer you a new lens through which to view relationship patterns, either in your own life or in the lives of those around you?

3. Can you recall a time when seeing a familiar person or place in a completely new context changed your perspective, similar to Adele’s experience at the party?

4. Perel champions playfulness as an essential ingredient for erotic intelligence. What does the idea of “play” mean to you as an adult, and where do you find space for it in your daily life?

5. The case of Elizabeth and Vito suggests that fantasies can be a “vacation” from our everyday roles. Are there any fantasies you employ to explore different sides of your identity? Do you keep these private or share them with your partner, and why?

Examine the book’s relevance to societal issues, historical events, or cultural themes.

1. Where do you see the cultural clash between Puritanism and hedonism that Perel describes playing out in today’s society?

2. Perel critiques the “can-do” work ethic that turns sex into a task to be optimized. Beyond the bedroom, how has this pressure to perform and be productive shaped people’s expectations for relationships?

3. The book touches on campus “hookup culture” as a place where emotion is often policed. What does this suggest about the challenges of developing integrated emotional and physical intimacy in the modern world?

Dive into the book’s structure, characters, themes, and symbolism.

1. What are the strengths and weaknesses of using anonymous case studies to build a psychological argument? Did you find yourself identifying with or questioning the narratives of couples like John and Beatrice or Ryan and Christine?

2. How does Perel’s approach of treating eroticism as a parallel narrative to love challenge other popular relationship philosophies that prioritize communication and vulnerability as the primary path to intimacy?

3. Perel’s writing is full of metaphors, from a “flannel nightgown” to the “shadow of the third.” Which of these images has stuck with you the most, and why was it so effective?

4. What is the effect of Perel sharing her background as the child of Holocaust survivors? How does this personal history inform her central argument that eroticism is an expression of aliveness?

5. The concept of the “anchor and the wave” comes from psychoanalyst Stephen Mitchell (5). How does Perel’s use of other thinkers’ work, like Mitchell’s or Bader’s, strengthen her overall argument?

Encourage imaginative and creative connections to the book.

1. Your task is to design a simple “date night” kit for couples inspired by one of Perel’s key ideas. Which idea would you choose, and what three items or activity plans would you include to help a couple explore it?

2. Map out an “erotic blueprint” for a non-romantic relationship, such as your connection to a creative pursuit, a city, or a field of study. What childhood experiences or core values have shaped the way you find excitement and meaning in that area?

3. Pen a short, one-paragraph “creation story” for a fictional couple, highlighting the initial mystery and separateness that Perel argues is so crucial for desire. What details would you include to show the “synapse” they had to cross to connect?