Nyc-
yes, this is why I struggled in my other thread with wording.
Maca's 2 year long "girlfriend" was much like this. They were casual in the sense that there was never a chance for integration into the family and they met up for sex infrequently.
But, they were 'tight' in terms of emotional, intellectual and spiritual connection.
Of course we met her together (that was circumstantial) and she was awesome. She actually hosted my last birthday party.
But, she was also not at all concerned about meeting the family and when things came up and he couldn't meet up with her alone for whatever reason-she would ask if we could all meet anyway. So she knew the kids and myself and GG and I would say she was a friend-even though I only saw her every few months or so.
I do understand what you mean about that difference. It's just hard to define it by terminology.
At any rate, one of the reasons it worked for so long with her (she moved out of state by the way)- is because she also had a family of her own and so she totally understood the importance of keeping her kid safe from predatory people, ensuring that lovers were accepting that they would never be MORE important than the child and that getting along with and respecting family responsibilities was critical to being able to have that loving relationship-even as casual as it was.
It really is very different if the people in question don't share households and child responsibilities.
It's hard for some people who don't have those responsibilities to understand that for those of us who have them can't simply drop them and run on a whim.
So we have more freedom to interact frequently if the person does take time to meet the rest of the family and build at least a friendly relationship (not necessarily FRIENDS, but friendly).