|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Great article that suggests "central" partner over "primary." Thoughts?
http://m.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%...2F&h=wAQF0QCyF I remember hearing the term "anchor partner" at one point too. Thoughts on that?
__________________
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
. Independent solo polyamorist seeking lover-friends willing to invest in friendship, companionship, and love, but without a need for partnership. Never confuse commitment with exclusivity, love with ownership, nor sex with intimacy! For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thoughts on this included that it reduces the risk of hierarchical thinking and could reduce the emotional impact of that hierarchical thinking.
__________________
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hmmm... when one person is given a designation that makes them special in some way, how is that not a hierarchy?
Central and primary would seem to be pretty much the same thing to me. Anchor a little less so, though it gives the impression of being tied to whomever is the anchor person in a way that one is not tied to other people. I'm not sure if many people are able to wrap their brains around the idea of "separate but equal" in poly relationships, especially when they are married and feel like their spouse should be considered before all others. It seems like very few people really take an egalitarian approach to poly, no matter how much they might say they don't like hierarchies. My guess is that comes with experience.
__________________
. Independent solo polyamorist seeking lover-friends willing to invest in friendship, companionship, and love, but without a need for partnership. Never confuse commitment with exclusivity, love with ownership, nor sex with intimacy! For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have no problem with hierarchy, or saying hubby is #1. Anything else is a fringe benefit,....so,..even I think it looks like a fluffy term to cover up shit with poop.
A few will use it correctly, and the rest will use it as a catch-phrase to sound more appealing and get what they want in the short-term. However if you like it, and feel inclined to it,..use it ! I just wouldn`t use it expecting it to change how people interact. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Primary is to central as secondary is to _____________?
I've always been opposed to the idea of hierarchy, but when you're living with partner(s) and have responsibilities around money and basic survival, it's necessarily more involved than a partner you don't share those things with. I'd really like to see labels built around those differences instead... "Hi, new friend! This is my partner, Jack, and my partner, Jill, who is also my _______________ because we own a house together." (or raise kids together, etc.) Primary Central Homebuilder Home plate (methinks poly baseball analogies are fertile ground) Checkmate Money-Honey |
![]() |
| Tags |
| definitions, defintions, equanimity, primaries, primary, primary/secondary, secondaries, terminology |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|