|
#41
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I do prioritize in terms of where I believe my largest amount of responsibility lies -- my husband followed by my other partners followed by my friends followed by acquaintances followed by strangers. We use the terms primary and secondary because they accurately describe how we function. Yes, some people may take the term secondary to mean disposable. I've experienced this. But I've also experienced situations where it didn't mean that. Until we find better terms, I'll continue to use them....
|
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In our case, secondary did not mean I was an inferior person; it did mean that if a fundamental conflict arose between the continued existence of both relationships, we all knew which one would end. This being what we wanted, in that situation and at that time, the word secondary was perfect. Quote:
NB: please note I am a secondary River on these boards and in this thread, ie not the River who posted several times already
__________________
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. Last edited by trueRiver; 08-29-2011 at 07:46 PM. |
|
#43
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Let me expand on this for a moment. (slight humour, but still a real cute hypothetical.) Say you, the poly guy, who wants love equally meets me, the lady who likes heirarchy, believes in primary/secondary. You ask me ' What does secondary means to you, would I love equally ?' I can then answer: ' No. I am not looking to love anyone equally to my partner. I can only offer_____________' You are then in a position of empowerment, and to make the best decision for you. Where as, a new term gets used amongst polys to help them feel better about being the 'second' person to come into someone they love, life. People who are going to treat you like garbage, are going to say whatever you want to hear. They will know the right lingo, know the right terms, and say what they think you want to know. It will not matter the catch-phrase, as word travels quickly. There is no invisible handshake or secret code, that only 'true polys' would know the real answer. So a liar tells you what you want to hear, and you believe their words, only to find out later, their actions dont match. So for those who want a new word to feel better about things in their own relationships,...that is why I say go for it. If it`s just the word that bothers you due to history,..then tell those you love, what terms suit you better. As a general population catch-phrase or terminology, I think it`s useless. It wont protect you from liars or jerks. That is why I say that people need to check their brain, and make sure their need for a new word, is for the right reason. I am perhaps seeing a general assumption made in a lot of these posts ( not just you, river.) that if someone likes secondary, or doesn't want to love on the same level, they are automatically not to be trusted. That they will hurt and degrade you. Treat you as inferior. I can only speak for myself, and the things I am told by others, but most people in the 'pro-secondary' column, are going to be blunt about what they want, and can handle. They DON'T want people at any cost. You are not going to find a higher ratio of liars in the pro-secondary column,..like anyone else, a good person, who is 'pro-secondary' is not going to want to attract the wrong people either. Last edited by SourGirl; 08-29-2011 at 07:46 PM. |
|
#44
|
||||
|
||||
|
Oh yeah! Tell me the truth, of course!
As for liars? I can only hope I will catch the scent of it and send them off and away. Don't want 'em, don't need 'em. But some folks are good at it, for sure!
|
|
#45
|
||||
|
||||
|
Exactly my situation. Of course, there is the difference that when I met Moonlightrunner, he was already married and hence I could at best be considered a co-primary, whereas my primary VanillaIce was single when we met.
I think the greatest difficulty with the term secondary is with those people who are, either by conviction or by happenstance only involved with the person who has a primary of their own. If both consider each other secondaries and have primaries of their own, I guess the baggage would be different, too.
__________________
"Resentment destroys more alcoholics than anything else. From it stems the root of our spiritual disease." "In dealing with resentments, we set them on paper - list people, institutions and principles with whom you are angry. Ask yourself why you are angry." "In most cases it was found out that our self-esteem, our pocketbooks, our ambitions, our personal relationships, including sex, were hurt or threatened. We were sore, burnt-up." Alcoholics Anonymous, 64-65. |
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
My gf and I have had this conversation because she hates those terms. She typically refers to me as her bf and OSO as her lover. She says she has feelings for him and he does for her as well. If they lived in the same area they would date, but do to the distance and the amount they get to see each other they don't have anything else to call it. I think if it would evolve more OSO would be good to use. I think the traditional titles are good for your "primary" it helps to define and reenforce the bond that is there.
|
|
#47
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'll start by saying, I've never studied polyamory, I fell into a poly relationship quite like I'm sure several of you have, a threesome that turned into more, so a lot of this terminology is new to me, we made up the rules as we went along. That said, it's always been this way for us, I have a wife, we've got a girlfriend, now, the girlfriend has a husband who knows about us, but is unable to participate due to health problems, and has only a couple years to live, at which point the girlfriend plans on moving in with us, she and the wife have recently taken to calling each other wife, which is fine, after 15 years she deserves that much, but for my own reasons, I still refer to her as my girlfriend, since she has a husband, and while physically not there, he's her main emotional tie. We love each other deeply, but that's a line I'm not crossing as of yet.
sorry about rambling, this is the first time I could put this into words, and it sounds pretty crazy to me, but whatever works. |
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
|
lucky 7,
That is probably one of the least crazy things, I have read on this site. Respecting others, is not crazy. Good on you guys. |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The idea that it is crazy came from everthing wrong that you were taught about relationships, and you and your 'polyfamily' are replacing that with the Truth you find within yourselves. Please, continue to follow the promptings of Love and Truth in your heart. Thank you for a really heartwarming post.
__________________
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. |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Wait a minute...that's right, the secondary status they indicate is actually a great accomplishment! So much for the notion that being secondary automatically indicates something negative! Seems that my "nope" was actually accurate, after all, eh? The term doesn't automatically imply anything negative. Negative connotations are baggage supplied by only some of the people.
__________________
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. |
![]() |
| Tags |
| definitions, descriptions, hierarchy, perscriptions, primary/secondary, secondaries, secondary, terminology |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|