Stories Told Together: Male Narratives of Non-Monogamous Bi+ and Heterosexual Men

Abstract

The stories we tell about our identities and sexual orientations shape how we perform gendered scripts and negotiate relationships with significant others. Previous literature inquired the styles and outcomes of consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships, but more research is need on how CNM men resist or abide to hegemonic models of masculinity. To understand how constructions of masculinity and conceptualizations of sexual orientation are embedded in CNMs, the study analysed the stories of non-monogamous Bi+ and heterosexual men. Following a critical narrative approach, the study inquired the diverse conceptualizations of masculinity, sexual orientation and relationship practices in the narratives of 20 non-monogamous Bi+ and heterosexual identified men. The semi-structured in-depth narrative interviews (105 min on average) were analyzed via Nvivo 12 and explored their stories of desire and the sense-making process of being sexually oriented to one or more genders and to one or more partner/s. Engaging in non-monogamy was signified as a relevant insight from their personal stories and/or from adopting new concepts of desire beyond the “love as a zero-sum game.” The latter theme was also shared by many heterosexual participants that, when negotiating a non-monogamous agreement, signified their attractions to more than one person as part of their personal identity. Finally, the paper discusses how non-monogamous spaces can offer a positive and safe space for bisexuals/Bi+ people to explore and reaffirm their identities, constantly challenged by biphobia, invisibility, and erasure. Experiences and stories of Italian cisgender Bi+ and heterosexual men cannot be generalized to the whole spectrum of masculinities within CNM spaces, and the study lacks how other gendered and sexual subjectivities construct masculinity. Diverse stories and construction of sexuality and gender can lead to similar relationship preferences and understanding how we signify them can greatly improve our understanding of intimacies.

A scoping review of research on polyamory and consensual non‐monogamy: Implications for a more inclusive family science

“…A few qualitative studies ( n = 5) explored how interpersonal negotiations within polyamorous and CNM relationships challenged traditional gendered norms. In doing non‐monogamy , participants aimed to subvert gendered and sexist notions of care and relationality in their partnerships, though they did not always succeed in doing so (Castro, 2021; Raab, 2018). For instance, gendered division of household chores often were reproduced even in the context of CNM and polyamory (Raab, 2018).…”

“…For instance, gendered division of household chores often were reproduced even in the context of CNM and polyamory (Raab, 2018). CNM relationships sometimes upheld heteronormative ideals and hegemonic masculinities (Castro, 2021; Sheff, 2006; Vaillancourt & Few‐Demo, 2014). For example, heterosexual men who did not have access to a strong social support network of other CNM‐practicing men were found to lack the access to feedback that could help them overcome feelings of jealousy in open relationships and challenge gendered ideals of care, leading them to uphold heteronormative ideas of masculinity in their relationships (Castro, 2021).…”

“…CNM relationships sometimes upheld heteronormative ideals and hegemonic masculinities (Castro, 2021; Sheff, 2006; Vaillancourt & Few‐Demo, 2014). For example, heterosexual men who did not have access to a strong social support network of other CNM‐practicing men were found to lack the access to feedback that could help them overcome feelings of jealousy in open relationships and challenge gendered ideals of care, leading them to uphold heteronormative ideas of masculinity in their relationships (Castro, 2021). Fantasies and soft swaps (i.e., engaging in varied forms of sexual play apart from sexual intercourse, which is only reserved for their partner) that created FFM triads (i.e., triads with two women and one man) generally did not destabilize heteronormative ideals because they (a) often positioned women as sexual objects who were desired by the man in the configuration, and (b) often were accompanied by the belief that intimacy between the two women in the triad existed for male pleasure and was not a threat to the “real relationship” between the man and woman (Wolkomir, 2020).…”

“…The breadth of literature borne from this burst of research activity is expansive. For instance, researchers have explored the nuanced intrapersonal and interpersonal processes involved in rewriting relational scripts beyond monogamy and subverting hegemonic notions of intimacy, relationality, power, and care (Castro, 2021; Vaillancourt & Few‐Demo, 2014; Wolkomir, 2015). Studies have examined laypeople's attitudes toward CNM and have identified attitudinal variations based on group membership (Rodrigues et al, 2022; Séguin, 2019).…”