Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:03 AM
seakinganswers seakinganswers is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 68
Default Not being the Primary

So this is strictly for educational purposes as I'm not currently in a poly relationship. But if you are not the Primary in a relationship then aren't you essentially in a submissive position. I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I love and respect a beautiful submissive woman personally. It just seems he or she would have little control or at least only as much control as the Primary would give them over how the relationship goes.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-12-2014, 12:53 AM
PolyinPractice PolyinPractice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 518
Default

You're inexperienced with poly, so I'll give you a break But that's very limited thinking. There's no reason why the secondary has to be submissive.

I started out as a secondary; there was a D/s dynamic, but it had nothing to do with the status of the relationship. It was simply new. He now considers me his co-primary (he has another primary). I am still submissive to him.

I'll say this, though, his other primary had the exact same thoughts as you: She felt I should be submissive to her since I had secondary status.

1) No.
2) Just because I may be submissive to your partner does NOT mean I have ANY relationship with you, let alone a submissive role. She was pretty annoyed when I didn't obey her the same way I obeyed him, though
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-12-2014, 03:57 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,235
Default

There doesn't even have to be a hierarchy, how about that?

Many of us practice egalitarian polyamory, where no one is primary, secondary, or tertiary at all -- and all partners are considered just as important as any other.

That being said, being submissive has nothing to do with being considered "secondary" or not.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-12-2014, 05:29 AM
Dagferi's Avatar
Dagferi Dagferi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,018
Default

I have separate but equal relationships with the men in my life.

Neither one out ranks the other. There its nothing submissive about either one.
__________________
40 yo straight female
Married in the eyes of the government to Butch since 2001...
Murf my monogamous second husband has been with me since May of 2012.
In a V relationship with an average 60/40 split of time. Only due to Murf's and Butch's crappy work schedules.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-12-2014, 05:30 AM
PolyinPractice PolyinPractice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
There doesn't even have to be a hierarchy, how about that?

Many of us practice egalitarian polyamory, where no one is primary, secondary, or tertiary at all -- and all partners are considered just as important as any other.

That being said, being submissive has nothing to do with being considered "secondary" or not.
To be fair, Nycindie, you can't really expect someone you just started dating to be as important as someone you've built a life with for twenty years. Doesn't mean there isn't potential for that new person, but that has to be earned and developed over time. I know you know this, and everyone here does, but newbies may not understand that
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-12-2014, 05:32 AM
JaneQSmythe JaneQSmythe is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pennsyl-tucky
Posts: 1,115
Default

We don't have any kind of BDSM/kinky arrangements in our "core Vee"...

That being said - my husband/primary is much more of a "go along/get along" type (Beta) than my boyfriend/"secondary" (I put secondary in quotes because I view us as more of "working toward co-primary") - who is much more of an Alpha-type male...as I am an "Alphas-type" female this often leads to conflict (which we Alphas are comfortable with ...but makes my husband uncomfortable).

Jane("an-Alpha-introvert")Q
__________________
Me: poly bi female, in an "open-but-not-looking" Vee-plus with -
MrS: hetero polyflexible male, live-in husband (together 21+ yrs)
Dude: hetero poly male, live-in boyfriend (together 3+ yrs) and MrS's best friend
Lotus: poly bi female, "it's complicated" relationships with Dude/JaneQ/MrS
TT: poly bi male, married to Lotus, FB with JaneQ
VV and MsJ: bi-women with male primaries, LTR LDR FWBs to JaneQ


My poly blogs on this site:
The Journey of JaneQSmythe
The Notebook of JaneQSmythe
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-12-2014, 05:38 AM
Dagferi's Avatar
Dagferi Dagferi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PolyinPractice View Post
To be fair, Nycindie, you can't really expect someone you just started dating to be as important as someone you've built a life with for twenty years. Doesn't mean there isn't potential for that new person, but that has to be earned and developed over time. I know you know this, and everyone here does, but newbies may not understand that
No you are wrong I have given any man I have dated equal consideration to Butch even in the early stages. Especially in the time department.

Why would anyone in their right mind hang around waiting for whatever scraps they would get thrown.
__________________
40 yo straight female
Married in the eyes of the government to Butch since 2001...
Murf my monogamous second husband has been with me since May of 2012.
In a V relationship with an average 60/40 split of time. Only due to Murf's and Butch's crappy work schedules.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-12-2014, 06:00 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PolyinPractice View Post
To be fair, Nycindie, you can't really expect someone you just started dating to be as important as someone you've built a life with for twenty years. Doesn't mean there isn't potential for that new person, but that has to be earned and developed over time. I know you know this, and everyone here does, but newbies may not understand that
Poppycock. I don't "know this," nor would I say everyone here also knows this. Not only do I disagree with your statement, I reject the use of any kind of hierarchy in intimate relationships! For me, hierarchy has no place in love relationships. When I love, I love. I don't love anyone more or less - I can't quantify love! Therefore I can't quantify someone's importance to me. Every human being is just as important as every other human being. Everyone I share my life and body with is equally important to me. Just because I might be married to someone for 20 years doesn't mean I cannot listen to and consider the needs of a newer partner with the same level of respect, kindness, empathy, and affection as anyone else I care about. Having a long, previously established partner should not mean that another, newer partner's time will never, ever come first! To always, automatically prioritize one partner over another would simply be cruel.

I feel that there is no such thing as giving 50-50 to a relationship. Each person gives 100% to each of their relationships. No matter who I am with, I strive to be fully present and 100% involved with the person in front of me. If I can't do that, why even attempt having more than one relationship?

Of course, there will be times the long-term established partner will come first, but that is not set in stone just because of the amount of time spent in a relationship with me. It should be need-based, not time-based. I did not say that every partnership or relationship would have the same dynamics nor that each person would always be given equal time -- equal is not the same as fair -- but I operate on a first come, first served basis. For example, if I make plans with a new lover and my long-term lover then wants to see me, too late - unless there's an emergency. In other words, whoever needs me most at the moment gets priority, like triage, not who "outranks" the other in terms of length of time with me. That's just ridiculous.

I find applying hierarchies to love relationships quite repugnant.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me. ~Bryan Ferry
"Love is that condition in which another person's happiness is essential to your own." ~Robert Heinlein

Last edited by nycindie; 02-12-2014 at 06:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-12-2014, 06:09 AM
PolyinPractice PolyinPractice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dagferi View Post
No you are wrong I have given any man I have dated equal consideration to Butch even in the early stages. Especially in the time department.

Why would anyone in their right mind hang around waiting for whatever scraps they would get thrown.
Does it have to be completely equal or scraps? When I first started dating my partner, I had no expectations that I would get the same, or even close to the same, amount of time or consideration of my needs as his long term partner. Nor did I have any inclination to give him as much as she gave him,

I would go about any new relationship the same way. Is that so wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-12-2014, 06:15 AM
PolyinPractice PolyinPractice is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 518
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
Poppycock. I don't "know this," nor would I say everyone here also knows this. Not only do I disagree with your statement, I reject the use of any kind of hierarchy in intimate relationships! For me, hierarchy has no place in love relationships. When I love, I love. I don't love anyone more or less - I can't quantify love! Therefore I can't quantify someone's importance to me. Every human being is just as important as every other human being. Everyone I share my life and body with is equally important to me. Just because I am married to someone for 20 years doesn't mean I cannot listen to and consider the needs of a newer partner with the same level of respect, kindness, empathy, and affection as anyone else I care about. Having a long, previously established partner should not mean that another, newer partner's time will never, ever come first! To always, automatically prioritize one partner over another would simply be cruel.

Of course, there will be times the long-term established partner will come first, but that is not set in stone just because of the amount of time spent in a relationship with me. It should be need-based, not time-based. I did not say that every partnership or relationship would have the same dynamics nor that each person would always be given equal time -- equal is not the same as fair -- but I operate on a first come, first served basis. For example, if I make plans with a new lover and my long-term lover then wants to see me, too late - unless there's an emergency. In other words, whoever needs me most at the moment gets priority, like triage, not who "outranks" the other in terms of length of time with me. That's just ridiculous.

I find applying hierarchies to love relationships quite repugnant.
Primary/secondary does not necessarily have to mean hierarchy; it could mean degree of connection. How much I love someone? Eh, meaningless, really. How do you quantify love? How much time I put into a relationship? To me, saying everyone is just as important means I work just as hard to fulfill everyone's needs...and it takes me a while, in a new relationship, to trust and open up. I don't really do NRE; I start off just having fun with the relationship and giving that person more and more as time goes on.....
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 06:37 PM.