Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-26-2011, 07:40 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,868
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-26-2011, 08:34 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 Ariakas View Post
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!
__________________
bi, partnered, available

River's Blog
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-26-2011, 09:33 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,374
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by River View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-27-2011, 04:32 AM
Kommander's Avatar
Kommander Kommander is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Detroit
Posts: 100
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-27-2011, 06:31 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,634
Default

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.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-27-2011, 07:19 AM
lilac lilac is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4
Default

For me I think 2 is plenty. I think it really just depends on the people involved and what everyone can handle.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-29-2011, 04:36 PM
just3's Avatar
just3 just3 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: OK
Posts: 71
Default

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
__________________
She is C He is S
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-29-2011, 07:08 PM
evrchanging's Avatar
evrchanging evrchanging is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 116
Default

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 by evrchanging; 06-29-2011 at 07:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-30-2011, 02:16 AM
AutumnalTone AutumnalTone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kansas City Metro
Posts: 2,186
Default

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.
__________________
When speaking of various forms of non-monogamy...it ain't poly if you're just fucking around.

While polyamory, open relationships, and swinging are all distinctly different approaches to non-monogamy, they are not mutually exlusive. Folks can, and some do, engage in more than one of them at a time--and it's all good.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-30-2011, 09:57 AM
BlackUnicorn's Avatar
BlackUnicorn BlackUnicorn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 906
Default

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.
__________________
Me: bi female in my twenties
Dating: Moonlightrunner
Metamour: Windflower
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
configurations, primary, secondary, tersiary, time, time limit, time management

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 07:01 AM.