Spam! Well, a question for all my poly friends out there, really

[mousme]

Okay, this has been floating at the back of my mind for a while now. Pleasepleaseplease don't take this the wrong way, it's not meant as a criticism, I just honestly don't know, 'kay?

When you talk about a "Primary" and a "Secondary," it gets a little confusing for me in terms of how the relationship works.

To me the word "secondary" implies "being of lesser importance than primary," which is kind of treacherous ground, if you follow. Clearly, this isn't exactly the case, as I doubt very strongly that many people would take kindly to being viewed as less important than someone else, especially in a loving relationship.

So what determines who is a Primary and who is a Secondary? Is it the chronological order in which you meet them? Is it the strength of the attachment?

If someone is your Primary, is it possible for you to be their Secondary? Or would you both necessarily be each other's Primaries?

Can someone change from being a Secondary to a Primary within the same relationship? Or vice versa? In the latter case, how do you tell someone that you'd like them to be your Secondary from now on rather than your Primary? Does that even happen?

Yeah. Sorry to butt into your private lives here. Maybe I should post this in a community about polyamory? (Suggestions?)

Comments

[griffen.livejournal.com]

You might post this same question in polyamory. There's a lot of people there who can help you with an answer. *snugs*

[ex-digitalis869.livejournal.com]

Hmm, obviously it's *possible* to do just about anything. So i won't be answering your questions so much as answering from my own experiences.

For me, a secondary is someone who either I a) Do not live with and with whom i have no plans to cohabit, b) I see on a very limited basis, like once or twice a week, or c) with whom i have no long-term plans. In other words, there are far more restraints on what i consider to be secondary relationships, than on a primary.

For example: I was a secondary to a woman who lived with her partner. We saw each other anywhere from one to three times a week on average, and it might have worked into something long-term eventually, but it started to take up too much of my time, and i was looking for a primary partner, someone who would live with me and be a part of my daily life. So, that is why it finally ended. I was happy with the relationship, and if i'd had a primary in my life at the time and things had been more stable for me, i might still be dating her. However, i needed too much down time and dating time and i didn't want to continue putting so many of my resources into something i saw as temporary, no matter how wonderful she was.

I also had a regular secondary relationship when i was living with a primary lover. I saw her once every week or two, and would have been happy to see her more frequently, as i was then in a stable primary relationship. However, i think she was also looking for a primary, and decided that the relationship was a waste of her time. Eventually we broke things off and lost touch. I've had several other relationships that other people would classify as "secondary", but to me they were dating relationships, which is entirely different. When dating, you're still just going out, and have no idea what kind of structure you want from something, or how serious you are or if something is going to last. Just getting to know each other and having a good time, although some of them would be viewed from the outside as secondary relationships, because many of these people were already in primary relationships, and didn't want another primary relationship.

To be blunt, secondary relationships *are* less important to me than primary relationships. It doesn't mean i don't care about them as friends or as lovers, it just means that in the final outcome, i put more time and energy into primary relationships, because i expect a much more serious return on my investment. I could see having long-term secondary relationships, but again, the return on my investment of time and energy would not be near what that would be in a primary commitment.

I doubt very strongly that many people would take kindly to being viewed as less important than someone else, especially in a loving relationship.

Actually i know people who *prefer* to be less important, and anything else makes them very nervous. I view all these people as damaged in some fashion because their ability/desire for any sort of commitment is broken. I know that puts me in the minority, becaus most people are anxious to say "everything you want is ok."

Honestly, i do have some problems with a secondary model of relationships, and i'm a little torn. I've made some good friends by dating people that way, people who have been close to me now for many years, but somehow i can't help but wonder if i wasted a lot of time that way when i was younger. You see, when i was younger, i felt like i had all the time in the world, and i had fun dating around, and the secondary thing worked for me. But now, i'm looking around, and all my friends are paired up, and i'm finding that i really want a partner, and looking around i see a bunch of people who want to use other people to inject life into their stale lives, without giving anything serious back. It's cynical, and nothing is ever that black and white, but still...i have these thoughts. I want someone to spend Christmas with, someone who will be there four and five nights a week, social functions, etc. And sure, friends can fill part of those needs, but not all of them.

[ex-digitalis869.livejournal.com]

If someone is your Primary, is it possible for you to be their Secondary?

In my opinion? No, not if you expect something to last. Otherwise someone is getting used, and will end up being unhappy. There will be tension, with someone wanting more than another person will provide, and i can't see that ever working long-term. However, i do know monogamous people who pair with polyamorous people and seem to have it work somewhat. On the other hand, if a monogamous person is paired with a polyamorous person, i consider them to both be polyamorous by default, even if one of the pair doesn't date anyone else. :}

Can someone change from being a Secondary to a Primary within the same relationship?

Sure. I've known people in the community who started dating a married person as that person's secondary, then somewhere down the line the married couple divorced, and the "secondary" became a primary. I've seen lots of similar situations occur, say for instance, a person who starts dating a couple as their secondary, and they eventually become and equal triad.

Vice versa would be way more tricky. I don't know anyone who has ever done this, but i'm sure it has, somewhere. Infinite variety.

There are tons of polyamory communities on lj, including one for monogamous partners that i just found when i did a search: http://www.livejournal.com/community/mono_poly/, http://www.livejournal.com/community/polyamory, http://www.livejournal.com/community/kith_and_kin, http://www.livejournal.com/users/askpoly/

Etc. You'd get a ton of answers if you asked in any of those places. I read the polyamory journal for a while, but honestly, polyamorists annoy the fuck out of me on the 'net far more than my adrenalin can handle, so i stopped. Then again, i haven't found a decent (and mainly non-irritating) polyamory community since Dallas, so maybe it isn't just the 'net.

[kimberly-a.livejournal.com]

I've been in one good poly relationship in the past (as well as one relationship that fumbled around pretending to be "sort of" poly in theory but monogamous in practice and it was all for ridiculous reasons so we just won't go there), but I also have quite a few good friends who are poly. So I'll let you know what my experience is.

First of all, "primary" and "secondary", in my experience, don't usually have anything to do with what order you meet people. They usually refer to the amount of time and energy you put into a relationship. So one person might have a lot of time and energy to offer, and someone else might not. One person might require a very devoted partner and another might not.

One person might be looking for a relationship that involves nearly daily contact, for example ... and that person wouldn't be happy as someone's secondary partner. But someone who is extremely busy with their work, friends, and other commitments might be perfectly happy to have only one relationship as someone else's "secondary". I, myself, have been in that sort of situation, and I felt relieved to not have my boyfriend wanting to spend constant time with me, because that would have been such a drain on my energy. I was perfectly happy to have one boyfriend I saw a couple times a week. I didn't want more than that, so it didn't bother me that he was with his other girlfriend many of those other evenings.

I also know some poly folks who really don't use the primary/secondary terminology. I am very close friends with a poly couple who have been living together for about 20 years and who are very much involved with each other's families, finances, etc. One of them also has also been involved another relationship for the past 10 years or so, but I simply can't imagine him referring to her as his "secondary" relationship. Both relationships are very important to him, even if he only sees one of the people a couple times each week and sees the other every day. He still loves them both. I wouldn't want to ask him who he would choose if forced to make a choice, because it's irrelevant. He doesn't have to choose. He just has different relationships with the two of them. But many poly folks would call those two relationships "primary" and "secondary".

I'm rambling. I know I'm rambling.

Lemme see if I can answer some of the other questions as they've been reflected in my own experience. Well, the one working poly relationship I was in worked like this:

R and D were married, so they were each other's primaries.

Then R met E and they started dating, so R was E's primary (since E had no other relationships), but E was R's secondary (because D was her primary).

Then E met me and we started dating, but I didn't have a lot of time or energy to spend on romance at that time in my life, so I didn't expect a lot of his time or energy and didn't interfere with his existing relationship with R. So E was my primary (since I had no other relationships), but I was E's secondary (because R was his primary).

So ... um ... yeah, it is definitely possible for one person in the relationship to consider it their primary relationship while the other considers it to be their secondary relationship, as long as everyone is okay with that (and in our situation it worked well for everyone).

How it works, or worked anyway, for me

[paganmommy.livejournal.com]

I have moved past the "primary/secondary" thing at this time in my life (for now anyway). That could change, and could simple be about how I am wired emotionally at this time.

How the label was used for my relationship was that it indicated who got first dibs on my time, which relationship was the foundation upon which all other relationships where built upon. My reasoning was that I am legally married with children, so my primary concern has to be that foundation. Should it falter, it wouldn't just be my romantic life that would fall apart, but my children's stability too. What I am seeing is that the label wass born (for me) out of a sense of insecurity and a need for "ownership". My name on the deed so to speak. This is a subject that has been popping up a lot lately in my brain, and so far, these are the answers I have for me anyway.
<--getting more coffee now