Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 09-14-2011, 02:52 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
You know what I hate? When someone tells me I should never wear my vertically striped shirt with my polka-dotted underwear and my checkered socks. That just irks me to no end!








If it's OK for Mondo, it's OK with me!

Um, back on topic: different strokes for different folks.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

me: Mags, 59, living with:
miss pixi, 37

Last edited by Magdlyn; 09-14-2011 at 03:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 09-14-2011, 03:11 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,894
Default

Third row, center photo: OUCH! She's HOT!
__________________
bi, partnered, available

River's Blog
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 09-14-2011, 09:40 PM
rory's Avatar
rory rory is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 496
Default

I agree with River in that while poly is a lovestyle it is also a discourse. Words are important, and they shape reality.

I think that primary and secondary imply hierarchy. It may be the connotations of the words themselves or it may be a cultural thing, whatever. It's there, if not for all, for many. That's why I don't think it's wise to use those words unless one wants to convey the message of the relationships being more and less important. Even if that's not the meaning the person using the words personally attaches to the words that is the meaning they convey to many.

I think it is problematic that many people in non-hierarchical relationships use primary and secondary labels. This is particularly when thinking about polyamory in relation to mainstream monogamous culture. I am sure that to many monogamists the terms primary and secondary refer to hierarchy (as they seem to do for many poly people, while not for many others, based on this discussion). Therefore, hearing those terms to be commonly used by many poly people, even in non-hierarchical relationships, gives the picture that poly relationships are most often hierarchical. Of course, even a poly structure where there actually is a more and a less important relationship still challenges the mainstream monogamous culture. But using hierarchical language in polyamorous relationships, even in ones that are equally important, enforces the so common belief that people really can't love equally, i.e. one must love one more than the other or polyamory involves no Real Love at all.

(Disclaimer: please note I'm not saying you must not use the terms primary/secondary, only voicing my opinion.)
__________________
Living with my partner Mya and metamour Hank. Seeing Lily.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 09-14-2011, 10:06 PM
Fidelia Fidelia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Right here. Right now.
Posts: 649
Wink

Greetings, Friends:

I've only read the first couple of pages of this thread. I hope I may throw in a couple of suggestions.

If you don't care for the terms primary and secondary, perhaps one or more of these may fit better.

For those who are married: husband, wife.

For lovers to whom you are not married: boyfriend, girlfriend, lover, sweetheart, benefriend (for FWB's).

In my tribe, most of us use husband, wife, bf and gf, but one of my bf's lovers doesn't like those terms. She just refers to each of us by our names.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 09-16-2011, 02:37 PM
Somegeezer's Avatar
Somegeezer Somegeezer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 805
Default

Sorry, no dictating meant. River was correct, I just can't PERSONALLY stand it being used. I should use my words more carefully sometimes.

I also think those photos are quite awful too... PERSONALLY.
__________________
[Insert witty comment here]
Feel free to add me up on facebook. - Just click here.
Do send a message in your request saying who you are and that you're from this forum. It will help me filter out any spam requests.
=]
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 09-16-2011, 04:16 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rory View Post
I think it is problematic that many people in non-hierarchical relationships use primary and secondary labels. This is particularly when thinking about polyamory in relation to mainstream monogamous culture. I am sure that to many monogamists the terms primary and secondary refer to hierarchy (as they seem to do for many poly people, while not for many others, based on this discussion). Therefore, hearing those terms to be commonly used by many poly people, even in non-hierarchical relationships, gives the picture that poly relationships are most often hierarchical. Of course, even a poly structure where there actually is a more and a less important relationship still challenges the mainstream monogamous culture. But using hierarchical language in polyamorous relationships, even in ones that are equally important, enforces the so common belief that people really can't love equally, i.e. one must love one more than the other or polyamory involves no Real Love at all.
I find this to be a brilliantly insightful post. Thanks so much, Rory! Brilliant.
__________________
bi, partnered, available

River's Blog
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 09-16-2011, 04:24 PM
rory's Avatar
rory rory is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 496
Default

Thank you, River. (And you're welcome, of course.)
__________________
Living with my partner Mya and metamour Hank. Seeing Lily.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 09-19-2011, 06:46 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,634
Default

There was some thing going around that perhaps a better term for primary partners would be anchor partner... I think it was Minx from Polyweekly
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 09-19-2011, 07:43 AM
Somegeezer's Avatar
Somegeezer Somegeezer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
There was some thing going around that perhaps a better term for primary partners would be anchor partner... I think it was Minx from Polyweekly
That makes me think that you are stuck with that partner, whilst every realtionship around it would be free to move around, unless anchored themselves. I find that husband/wife, girlfriend/boyfriend, partner, etc. are all you really need. They are the simplest to understand. They shouldn't require any explaining to the average person. Until of course, it comes to the point where you mention you have 5 other ones. =P
__________________
[Insert witty comment here]
Feel free to add me up on facebook. - Just click here.
Do send a message in your request saying who you are and that you're from this forum. It will help me filter out any spam requests.
=]
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 09-19-2011, 08:57 AM
trueRiver trueRiver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Manchester, England & Tain, Scotland
Posts: 85
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by River View Post
There is no official or institutional authority ("Poly Police") within the poly discourse,...
they'd simply be 'Polyce' surely?

why miss the chance of a pun?
__________________
River~~

There are two Rivers here now: which one is this?

see
quaker poly experiences and poly: a quaker perspective

I hope other British Quakers who are poly (or wonder if they are) will contact me here, thanks, Friends.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
definitions, descriptions, hierarchy, perscriptions, primary/secondary, secondaries, secondary, terminology

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:02 PM.