How many?

River

Active member
I'm curious to know how people here think about the question ... How many "serious" partners are workable? And by "serious," I mean deeply involved loving ("romantic") relationships that involve long-term commitment, akin to marriage (or inclusive of marriage).

I realize this question depends enormously on how much "free time" one has, which may be a vague concept (free time), so that's open to discussion as well.

Lately, I've been thinking that two is plenty, while three could--would likely-- push beyond my capacities. At the same time, perhaps three would be possible, as the upper limit, sometime well into the experience of having two such partners.

I could see myself having a larger chosen family, however. Cuddly, but not sexual friends. Committed, intimate companions who are not also lovers. In fact, I'd really like that!:)
 
For me the magic number is 3. I could have extra cuddly friends or possibly FWB, I suppose, but I wouldn't want to commit to more than the 3 wonderful people in my life right now. Though how I feel in no way reflects how they feel or restricts them to the same.
 
My ideal is three or four partners to whom I would be equally committed in my heart, although some of them may not be able to engage with me as frequently as others, such as in the case of a long distance love. But they would all be of equal importance and standing to me -- three or four "primaries," for lack of a better term (not my preferred word).

That's my fantasy. Time will tell if I can really juggle that many in reality. I know I can love that many, but can I give to all of them and manage the mundane details of multiple loves in a way that they feel their needs are met and I am not emotionally (or physically!) depleted?

I have no desire to cohabit with anyone for now, so my dream means I would be living independently while nurturing these relationships, all of equal importance to me. Maybe when I'm much older, there would be one (or two) who could be more of a live-in companion (or companions).
 
Last edited:
I've been wondering about this question on a more basic level. I don't even know if I could have two primary - however one defines that - relationships. In fact, I wonder about my capacity to handle a primary relationship and a significant secondary one.

I don't have an answer right now. I think it's going to depend on my willingness to be open and take emotional risks.
 
This is a hard question. I think this evolves with time. Right now I have two partners, which feels plenty and I have no desire for more. But I do not think I could have started a second relationship some years ago, because I doubt either me or my husband, or our relationship, would have been ready for it at that point. Thus, there was fullness with one relationship. I can't say precisely when it is that the situation changed, but when I met my girlfriend we were lucky enough that both of our marriages were in a place that made poly possible.

At the moment, making this situation work is taking all my energy and concentration, and I definitely am full. Also, it would be way too soon for my girlfriend, and our relationship, for me (or her) to have a third partner. And, me having a girlfriend is a big adjustment for my husband, which is why it would be too soon for him as well, and to the relationship between us.

So, right now there are many reasons why I'm full, both within me and in my relationships. But the relationships will evolve and settle and so the situation might allow for a third partner at some point. I had been with my husband for about 7 years before our relationship became poly. So, maybe another 7 years until the relationships are ready for it; and then we'll still have to see if I have time/energy etc. :p
 
Damn! This came up before in a thread called "how many is to many" or something like that, but I can't remember the tag or who started it! Maybe someone will remember.

Time gets way to thin at two, but three is doable depending on the arrangement. Even four in some cases. I have four, but I see one only once a month and another every two weeks or so. The other two I live with. Its busy, but we worked out a balance. It helped to be up front about how much I could offer and refraining from feeling guilty and sorry I can't give more.
 
I haven't ever had more than two "serious" partners at a time. I once had two who were serious emotionally, now I have two where one is deeply emotional (aka my husband), and the other isn't, but I spend the amount of time with that I'd spend with somebody one on one if it did happen to be deeply romantic.

I do have free time, as well as a desire for another relationship that has more of a really good friend aspect to it. I think it should be easily doable, but I wonder if I am fooling myself, and I'd end up not having enough time for my husband, chores, and personal time. I have found I want to be good friends with a partner if I don't see them often, to communicate regularly with them about life and other mundane crap.

Now I don't think of relationships that are inclusive or akin to marriage too much. I am more interested in dating people already in committed relationships for a variety of reasons, and while I could see myself even perhaps for a lifetime, with a second "primary" (live in) partner, my husband isn't particularly interested in this. I do think of lifetime best friends with romantic and sexual connections though.

I think I could handle two romantic relationships and one casual (heart-wise) but regular relationship. I don't happen to think really casual sex would work for me, but do wonder if I could even fit a fourth occasional thing in there if it was a friend with benefits with the stress on FRIENDS. Now I just have to wait for the right friend to come along to test that theory. ;)

I figure there are a some ways to fit this into life if my current second relationship stays somewhat constant, which I don't know about yet.
1. I spend time with my partner's spouse/family friends and vice versa, so they can be a part of my life but I don't have to worry about having 1-2 days every week to spend alone time with them to feel close. If lucky my husband wants to hang out with them too. I get social time with two or more people who are important to me. Everybody profits. A bit problematic because my husband doesn't tend to be buddies with people I like & the person I'm dating regularly now doesn't do the "family poly everybody hangs out" thing. I still keep my fingers crossed this happens in the future though. If super lucky somehow this involves one of my husband's partners and their families too, and board games and zombie killings and good food and wine!
2. See hypothetical 3rd partner once a week or less but have regular email/chat conversation with them to catch up on friendship maintenance.
3. Find somebody who is free weekdays, so I can still spend plenty of time on the other two relationships.
4. See my other two partners 1.68 times a week, have my husband involved in two similarly intensive relationships with schedules that can all be coordinated to make this work, and make sure the 3.64 days of a week I spend with him always ends up being quality time....

Yep, I spend a lot of time thinking about this :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I don't have a lot of experience with poly, but when I think about it, I can think of the following situation (not the only situation possible of course):

- Two live-in primaries.
- one secondary (with their own primary(ies), possibly married to someone involved with one of my primaries, or something like that) that I don't live with and don't have serious life plans revolving around but who is a regular part of my life.
- a bunch of tertiaries, either friends with benefits or people I just can't see very often. The exact number could vary, but since I'm likely to be able to see them only something like once or twice a year at conventions or the like, the only important thing would be that I can see them at different conventions, or at a con that as more days than I have tertiaries there. I'd want to have one night for each of them at least.


Each of these people could have other partners, and ideally they probably would (or have the potential to at some point), as I think a mono/poly relationship would be more challenging.
Of course, I'll take what actually happens. I have no clue what that will be, and it's unlikely to match this scenario. However, this is the kind of thing I think I would be able to deal with. Three primaries seems too much to me, and (possibly weirdly) so does two secondaries. I guess it seems easier for me to have two primaries because I'd be living with them and therefore not "sharing" my time between them as much, or a bunch of tertiaries because I'd see them so little that it wouldn't affect our relationship much if I have like five of them or something, but a secondary is at that mid-point where I think I'd deal better with only one of them.
 
It depends on the people. Imho.. It depends on the depth of each relationship and the time requirements.

I was asked this recently.. I think.. for me there is a very real possibility of maintaining

primary, secondary and tertiary..

How that looks, or the logistics, to many variables to really narrow it down. I know I couldn't do two primaries. I don't have enough time in my day between work and life, to maintain that strong a time requirement with two people.
 
Whenever I think about the whole matter of primary and secondary and tertiary..., I end up thinking that either I'm all in it, or I'm not. And if I'm not all in it, how is it a loving relationship? I don't want to love any of my partners any less and I don't want to rank them in any way. So I guess that means I can only have primary relationships, whether I live with each of them or not, or howevermuch time I spend with either.

I realize that the primary/secondary/tertiary thing is necessary and workable for some people, and my words here are not meant to be offensive or judgemental toward anyone. But that's how it think-feels when I think and feel about it.
 
Sometimes the designations are descriptions of the relationship model.. describing time invested, or the time allowance. It can mean other things too.

I know I don't use it as a descriptor of how much I love someone.

I don't believe I could time manage two primaries. I have a wife, we want kids, we have 11 years invested and a lot of things in our lives both planned and in the past.

If I had found someone at the same time as my wife, sure, maybe. Different time and place. But as it stands right now, I can't foresee having two primaries.. or having "all things created equal"..

I know I can love equally, I am doing it and have done it.. :).. those designations will never describe the level of love I feel for someone.
 
I know I can love equally, I am doing it and have done it.. :).. those designations will never describe the level of love I feel for someone.

Nice! :)
 
I don't want to love any of my partners any less and I don't want to rank them in any way.

Oh, to me it's not about amount of love, it's about the kind of relationship I guess. A tertiary would be someone that due to some constaints, you don't get to see often and or are more casual with, so a friend with benefits or a partner I only see once a year and don't have much contact with the rest of the time would both count as tertiaries for me.

A primary would be someone I want to share my life with, live with, make big projects with, plan finances together, share big expenses, and if I wanted kids or if they have them, the kids would be raised together.

A secondary is in the middle, someone who has other attachments, for instance a primary and children who live somewhere else, and who always will need that family (their children) to have a priority lane, meaning that if we're having a date and something happen to their kids, they ditch me and I go back home (vs a primary for whom we'd both go back home see what's going on, since it would concern both of us).

It wouldn't be about the amount of love, but more the time and energy that would be required for such a relationship. I'd never tell someone "hey, let's date, but you'll me my tertiary because that sounds good". However I may meet someone, and we'd realise we can't see each other often, or that our life plans are too different, or that we're friends more than lovers, and our relationship would be tertiary.

For me it's more of a description. It's like saying a childhood friend or a close friend or a distant friend, it's not something I decide and it's not about me deciding to love them more or less, it's about what life throws at us and how we end up in relation to one another.
 
It depends on a lot of factors, but the limit of primaries for any situation is eight. I can prove this with with a fairly simple equation...

Actually, I'm pretty terrible at math, and that was all bullshit. Well, except for the "many factors" part; that's probably true.

For me personally, I have no idea. At most, I've only dated two people at the same time, one could probably be called primary and the other secondary in the one situation I was in. With what I have going on now could be two tertiary relationships, or possibly secondary, but none of this is really an accurate description.

One of the reasons I started to identify as polyamorous in the first place is so I would stop trying to quantify everything. It's all friendship to me. Whether it takes on the form of a primary relationship, a "friends with benefits" thing, or even Platonic friendship; it's all the same. The intensity is different from person-to-person, and even varies in each individual relationship. I just enjoy the various connections I make with people, and try not to worry too much about where I want the relationships to go. In my experience, deciding what I want from a relationship before I know what's possible is the best way to assure it never gets to that point.

The magic number for me might be three, or ten, or one... possibly zero. Most of the time for me is is zero, and I'm perfectly happy with it.
 
Gaud I hate that primary, secondary, tersiary thing... ;) especially as I seem to be living it by the descriptions and definitions so far. The loves I have are all equal. I spend a certain amount of time with each one, but in my heart, if we were all on a desert island together, I would divide my time up equally. I don't half love Mono, or a third love Derby or a fourth Leo... and mostly love PN. I get that primary, secondary, tersiary is a way of describing, but it truly is not about love for me. Its about time.

I could love someone else too I suppose, but I am finding that with only seeing Leo once a month, and that isn't enough, that is it for me. I guess one cannot stop love, so who knows. I remain open and always ready to receive. :p
 
For me I think 2 is plenty. I think it really just depends on the people involved and what everyone can handle.
 
After much discussion with hubby 2 is the limit. I have a primary and a secondary. But long term would like it to be 2 primary and thats it. S is mono and so is our new addition J. And No way could I deal with more LOLOL.
Chris
 
I have kids so I am taxed, and when I put into a relationship I put all. I hate being half assed. The two I got is working great. I want to put more time into the Lover and make him more primary too. I wouldn't mind having a female lover as well, or a younger male lover. That is stretching it, but I am evrchanging, so I can adapt. I would say 3 max. for me. If I found a candidate it would be major talking with Lover and Jewel as they are very mono, odd I know. A female I think would pass with both of them over another younger male. I too have thought this one over. My love cup is overflowing.
 
Last edited:
I am quite uncertain as to how many partners I can handle. I've always felt there's been "room" for more in my life, though I've never been in a situation where everybody was local and interacting on a daily basis. I can guess three or four because I can easily imagine that as workable; that's still very much a guess, however.
 
If everyone were to live separately and in the same town with me, two is the maximum number I could fit in logistically at this point if I would want to see them on a weekly basis.
 
Back
Top