Non-Monogamous Relationships: An Analysis from Reports

The origins of monogamy remain a complex and under-researched area. Scientific consensus, as highlighted by Barash and Lipton (2002) and Knoblauch (2018), suggests that humans are not inherently or biologically monogamous. Instead, monogamy is understood as a socially, sociologically, and culturally learned behavior. Barash and Lipton (2002) further characterize monogamy as a rare and challenging form of relating. They argue that monogamy often clashes with natural inclinations, noting its infrequency in the animal kingdom, particularly among mammals. They distinguish between social monogamy, defined as living with a single partner (more common in birds and rare in mammals, with humans being an exception), and sexual monogamy, which involves exclusive sexual relations with one partner and is even less prevalent. The work of Jethá and Ryan (2011), 'Sex at Dawn: How We Mate, Why We Stray, and What It Means for Modern Relationships,' supports this, asserting that sexual monogamy is virtually non-existent in nature. Their research integrates biological, evolutionary psychology, anthropological, and philosophical perspectives, revealing a sophisticated web of manipulative articulations that foster a blind belief in monogamy. The authors challenge the scientific tendency to align human behavior with chimpanzees (aggressive and violent) rather than bonobos (who resolve conflicts through sexual interaction), despite both species sharing 99% of human DNA. Neither chimpanzees nor bonobos are monogamous. However, the authors draw parallels between human sexual behavior and that of bonobos, specifically highlighting the trait of concealed ovulation and continuous sexual receptivity, a characteristic not found in chimpanzees but present in bonobos and humans. This biological observation has philosophical implications, contrasting the Hobbesian individual (aggressive, uncooperative, ambitious, akin to chimpanzees) with the Rousseaunian individual (innately good, corrupted by society).

Non-monogamous relationships (NMR) represent a diverse spectrum of relational configurations that deviate from the societal norm of exclusive romantic and/or sexual partnership. This study investigates the fundamental characteristics of NMR and the process by which individuals identify with this relational orientation. It explores the critiques that non-monogamy poses to traditional monogamous structures, highlighting how NMR can challenge the perceived exclusivity and possessiveness often associated with monogamy. The research examines the various possibilities and forms that non-monogamous relationships can take, acknowledging their fluidity and adaptability. Furthermore, it touches upon the legal foundations, or lack thereof, that pertain to NMR, and the role of sexual education in shaping perceptions and understanding of diverse relational models. The author's personal journey as a bisexual and non-monogamous individual informs the research, framing it as a political endeavor to bring these relationships out of invisibility and foster healthier, more autonomous relational choices.

The justification for this research stems from the pervasive invisibility of non-monogamous relationships (NMR) within academic discourse and broader society. The author, Bianca Longhitano, identifies as bisexual and non-monogamous, and her personal experiences have fueled a passion for understanding and destigmatizing these relational forms. The study is framed as a political act, aiming to bring marginalized populations and their relational experiences into the light, fostering healthier and more equitable connections. The primary objective is to produce much-needed knowledge about the non-monogamous population in Brazil, given the scarcity of existing research. This involves exploring the political, gender, and sexual orientation biases within NMR, as well as understanding the fundamental characteristics of these relationships and the process of identity formation. Ultimately, the research seeks to provoke critical reflection on how we relate to one another, paving the way for greater respect and understanding of pluralistic relational models.

The data collection for this research utilized two primary instruments: a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The 'Questionário Identitário de Pessoas Não Monogâmicas' (QIPNM) was developed to gather quantitative data, focusing on general characteristics of the participants and their current relational statuses. This questionnaire was administered virtually. Complementing the quantitative data, 9 semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore the qualitative aspects of non-monogamous relationships. These interviews allowed for a deeper understanding of participants' personal narratives, their experiences within NMR, and their views on broader societal constructs like gender, sexuality, family, and politics. The analysis of the collected data involved thematic block analysis for the qualitative data, allowing for the identification of recurring themes and patterns within the interview transcripts. The quantitative data was analyzed to provide statistical insights into the characteristics and relational dynamics of the surveyed non-monogamous individuals.

This section synthesizes the findings from both the quantitative and qualitative analyses, engaging in a discussion of the implications of the research on non-monogamous relationships (NMR). The study highlights the complex interplay of political, gender, and sexual orientation factors within NMR, challenging simplistic notions of these relational structures. The research underscores the potential of NMR to offer alternatives to monogamy, which is critically examined as an institution that can perpetuate gender violence and other oppressions. The author reflects on how NMR might serve as a protective factor against systemic violences, drawing upon both theoretical frameworks and the lived experiences of participants. The dissertation concludes by emphasizing the political significance of bringing NMR into mainstream discourse, advocating for greater visibility, understanding, and respect for diverse relational models. The final considerations call for continued research and a societal shift towards recognizing and valuing pluralistic approaches to love and connection, moving towards a future where critical thinking and respect guide our relational choices.