It seems to me Leo and the founders of spiral dynamics have (ironically) once again left out some of the more feminine manifestations of the stages... I want to hear what you think - especially girls.  I'm convinced an overlooked facet of orange is serial monogamy, soap-opera style drama and the whole fairytale "romantic love" ideal. Leo said orange doesn't believe in love or care about emotion, and he gave us the stereotypical pick-up guy who treats sex as an achievement picture for orange relationships, but hey - some girls also go screw a lot of guys, but most have other patterns. Like trying to find THE ONE who can make her feel love and be happy.  My take on spiral dynamics and relationships tl;dr: There's plenty of orange relationships which are not empty of romance but where people still treat each other as a means to an end.  IMHO all stages are capable of having some compassion for their nearest and dearest, of pair-bonding or being non-monogamous etc.  Blue will place restrictions on relationships to comply with the group's structure.  Monogamous marriage, as an institution, is the ideological child of blue, designed partly to protect property and inheritance. I'm not saying monogamous people today can't be further in their development, however, the structure they adopt is one that has served as the religious one-true-way and a social obligation. That's quite clear.

Orange, IMHO, breads the romantic love ideal - only you choose the best partner for you. Think about it, marriage based on love and choosing your loved one yourself actually becomes popular around the same time as capitalism does. It also gives rise to serial monogamy. Now the individual is more important than the relationship (structure), so “moving on when a relationship no longer suits you” is celebrated sometimes as the right thing to do. So what you get is people just dating and sleeping around, but also relationships which were born from the belief in one true love ... ending in bitter divorce after a few years when the new and exciting vanishes and people failed to develop deep intimacy.  In orange you may have the guy who judges women on their looks and the girl who is attracted to money and power and the teenage girl who worships a pop-star, but also the woman who reads romantic fiction and is looking for "true love" - where loving her is of course measured by her personal standards of behaviour. "If he truly loved her, he would/wouldn't..." Heck, we don't even have to read romantic fiction to buy into this set of beliefs, it's everywhere in the pop-culture starting with fairy-tales (purple?), and encompassing fantasy literature and romantic movies (orange/green). Notice how this perception of love is equally objectifying to man as the "male gaze" to women - the man here also becomes a means to an end, he's the one to provide the love I want, to bring my "happily ever after", the one to earn money and care for family and give me sex, cuddles, flowers and dates, and the one who's to blame if I'm not feeling the love I expect from a relationship. What he's NOT, unless in love, is a fascinating being of his own to connect with - hence sometimes marriages of mostly stage orange people turn into a fight for influence and "whose way is the right way" after the initial infatuation wears off. And then people say "he/she wasn't right for me". At orange, we also get narcissism as a couple, the "two against the world", where people manage to get absorbed with each other and just merge into codependence without having any helpful impact on the world as a unit.  Orange also has a tolerance or even looks for, drama. After all, the emotions you suppress in your work-life have to come out somewhere. Hence conflicts with your spouse, and hence soap-opera and gossip.  There are also guys who buy into the romantic love ideal. A lot of them. Guys also want love and know they want love, not everyone is completely cut off from their emotion at orange. IMHO for women, the transition into green in relationships is not necessarily about starting to focus on emotion and believe in "love" - though the word certainly gets a redefinition - but rather realizing that participation has to be truly voluntary and you can't change your lover. Only from that realization people can find an appreciation for true connection and start to base their relationships at that quality. Green development in relationships is imho finding true intimacy. Also, grasping how love comes from inside, not from the person you're in relationship with. Sometimes you do that with your spouse, sometimes you skew a bit more communal even in your love life. Green is also about going global with your empathy and applying the loving-kindness you've learned in your personal relationships to the whole world. As an aside, polyamory in my view is a funny blend of green and orange values. The ideology of abundant love must be an ideal of green, as are more communal forms of poly. Also the emphasis on processing feelings, everyone being heard and valued etc. 
However for most people, I the main motivations are more individualistic. Personal freedom to pursue your attractions. Sexual variety. Not being bound by any convention. Needless to say, orange polyamory not heavily tempered by green compassion doesn't work that great. But living the "green" ideas also seems difficult for most people. It could be we are simply not there yet, or it could be an example of a green ideal which is not that easily brought into practice. 

I wonder what yellow relationships are like. Maybe the dilemma between monogamy and non-monogamy proves itself false somehow? Well, if you've read all that, thanks for your time and please tell me if I'm getting some interesting points right or if I'm re-inventing my own spiral