Originally Posted by AggieSez
That's an interesting point. "Primary/secondary" implies hierarchy, and in a hierarchy whatever isn't at the top of a hierarchy is a lower priority that is either limited or warrants less consideration, especially when navigating conflicts or quandaries. In polyamory, hierarchy usually does restrict the scope or potential of some relationships. Ethically, how do you reconcile that?
Thanks for the compliment
To answer your question, it's only unethical, imo, when you limit others. Say I'm married, but wish to date. I may not WANT to be a primary to my dating partner; primary relationships come with more responsibility and commitment (if you define a primary relationship as long term, multiple attachments, kids, shared finances, household, etc, as I would argue most people do). I may never want to spend more than a few hours a week or month with that other person. I may be quite content as a secondary.
Also, say I DO want to have a primary style relationship with my dating partner. It's unfair of me to expect to be as important, straight off the bat, as their long term partner. It takes time to develop a primary style relationship (even in monogamy, you date for awhile before committing to more). But I would want the possibility to mean as much to my partner, should we invest the time and effort into the relationship. Not be considered a "secondary" simply because I came along second.
Am I making any sense?