Is it your implicit assumption that non-monogamy can include non-sexual friendships (because if someone is, per your article, both non-monogamous and non-sexual, this is the logical consequence)? If so, what differentiates a "non-monogamous non-sexual" friendship from regular ordinary non-sexual friendship? If this is not the case, then how can a person be non-monogamous and also non-sexual? It seems as if, by trying to be all-inclusive, you've arrived at an inconsistent definition of non-monogamy that may be rather confusing for readers.