Originally Posted by london
I use primary and secondary to describe levels of entanglement. Not everyone is married not everyone even cohabits and so the term would more or less be moot. But a hell of a lot of people do share practical entanglements and responsibilities with at least one partner, without marriage, and primary seems a good way of describing those relationships.
I use "primary" and "non-primary" in that case, i.e. when the practical entanglement is the only difference. I had always been uncomfortable with "secondary" because it implies less emotional involvement and/or a lesser status, but still used it for convenience, until I read this blog post: Why I say "non-primary", not "secondary"
Heteroromantic asexual female, sex-positive, childfree, relationship anarchist.
Married to G, and in a partially non-romantic, completely non-sexual and long-distance triad with A and L.