Advice for a secondary in a slowly opening marriage

Empathizing in a personal way here.... I haven't even held hands yet with my FarawaySweetie, nor kissed her, nor gazed into her eyes. What I have done is exchanged a lot of emails--and I mean a LOT. And talked long hours on the phone. So I understand the challenge of patience and waiting. Only, in my case, patience and waiting are about (a) she's very recently divorced and still grieving the end of that relationship (b) she lives twelve hundred miles from me, and I from her.

Eight months? Good grief, I'd pull my hair out after a certain duration.

Your gal's husband sounds a bit too freaked out about his gal's loving another man, if you ask me. Will he EVER allow her and you the freedom to love whom you love without constraint? Consider this question carefully.
 
By the way, this story exemplifies why I'd never, ever, ever want to be anyone's "secondary". If I am in love with someone who is in love with me, I'd want -- and insist upon -- equal status with my other Sweet's partner/s. Why should one of them get to decide how I can be with my love, without my equal participation in that decision?

Some folks will insist that "secondaries" are not that, exactly. But look around at how they behave and decide for yourself.

"Secondary" is almost always a ranking system. That's fine for those who want to come in second class, but not me.
 
Hey now, River. To me, "secondary" is a very useful term in that it describes a real and prevalent type of relationship. We can be equal in love and in respect but we can't always play the same roles in each other's lives. Maybe we as a community could find a term with less baggage, but we need some way to talk about the fact that we have different levels of entanglement in each other's lives. Different types of partnerships. To me, secondary means a relationship where you're serious and an important part of each other's lives but probably not formally committed and not making life decisions in a building-our-lives-as-a-unit type way.

Are you really saying you'd never be in such a relationship? Or that we shouldn't have a way to talk about the issues and questions that naturally come with such a relationship?

Or am I completely misunderstanding the word?

This may be a topic for the General Discussion board...
 
This is great advice. But I lack the tools to do so. What do I say?

I have been understanding--you don't turn a traditional monogamous marriage of 21 years into an open one overnight. This has been driven by my nature to be compassionate, and to see things from everyone's point of view. But also, I must admit, partly out of fear. I didn't want to upset her husband and jeopardize the relationship and any potential forward progress.

It sounds like you've been causing yourself a LOT of hurt in the process. I admire you for your self-control and for your consideration, but at this point, what do you really have with her that you would lose? Yeah, if they shut you down, it would hurt for awhile, but that might, in the long run, be better than the torment you are currently experiencing.

And, depending upon how you voice your concerns, you might not get shut down. No one is born with the ability to read minds--it is very possible that the husband does not know how you are suffering, and will be taken quite aback when he realizes just how hard you have worked to take care of his concerns. He also might not, but you will never know if you do not try.

If you do not try, the best you're going to get for awhile is no more than what you have right now. Ask for what you want--the worst that will happen is that you do not get it.

kidsoul said:
Another thing, I'm not sure she fully understood just how painful this has been for me until now. How do I convey these sentiments without hurling (e.g. LOOK WHAT YOU DID TO ME!!) emotional slings? I guess in some ways, you can't. But I do want to avoid "twisting the knife" as it were, if that's possible. Anyone have advice on this?

See, it's that mind-reading thing again. You cannot be certain that people know what you are feeling unless you tell them. The other side of that coin is that you cannot be certain that you know what others are feeling unless they tell you. This may require that you ask them.

There is a lot out there in the big bad internet about communication and polyamory (from "I" language to minimizing or avoiding conflicts, even when talking about difficult subjects). It might not hurt to ask some questions and let husband and wife talk for awhile, ask some more questions, and so on, until you believe you understand where their heads and hearts are at. Then it's your turn, and after they've seen that you're willing to take the time to listen, they may be more receptive to your words.

Practice what you want to ask, and what you want to say. Rehearse it. Maybe even make an outline. Remember H.A.L.T.--do not have a deep conversation that may involve having to stand up for yourself when any of the participants are Hungry, Angry, Lonely, or Tired (H.A.L.T.). Everyone should be fed, rested, calm, and in their happy place, if possible. That helps to avoid throwing dry kindling onto a fire, so to speak.

Here's an example of how it might go (salt to taste):

"I know you've been going through a lot right now, and I've tried very hard to stay out of the way and not push. However, I am having a very hard time right now with the restrictions that are on the relationship I have with X. I care very deeply for her, and have been unable to adequately express affection for her for a very long time now. Can we, together, consider moving the boundaries?"

Make sure, if what you get is a much smaller step than you would like (and it probably will be), that you have an agreement to have this discussion again in a few weeks or at most two months. Don't let yourself get rolled here--you may have to do some nudging to keep the relationship moving. If you get a lot of pushback, or a lot of anger, you may need--for your own sake, to walk away from this situation.

DO read the "Secondary Bill of Rights" at the xeromag website. You MUST be given consideration as part of the secondary relationship to negotiate what that relationship will look like; what the boundaries are, what the schedule is like, etc. If they simply want to impose their view upon you, you are going to be an unhappy, frustrated, resentful, hurt fellow.
 
To me, secondary means a relationship where you're serious and an important part of each other's lives but probably not formally committed and not making life decisions in a building-our-lives-as-a-unit type way.

Are you really saying you'd never be in such a relationship? Or that we shouldn't have a way to talk about the issues and questions that naturally come with such a relationship?

Note the fact that I personalized my comment by saying I, personally, would never wish to be anyone's "secondary," so defined. Not if I'm in love with them, I'd not. I'd be hurt and offended if someone I loved -- am in love with -- called me "secondary". It's the word I despise. But I'd despise it only if directed at me. And maybe I'd feel compassion toward another who has had it directed at them. But I'm not going so far as to say that the word is morally wrong. If all persons invloved are happy with that word, great. Let them have it.


EDIT:

Let's say X is my Dear Sweetheart-lover-partner, and she meets another man and they decide to live together, with me not sharing a house with them. That would be FINE with me! Let's say they share finances, share in important decisions about livlihood, location, etc.... All of that would be fine with me. I'd love her no less and feel no less loved. But if she described me as her "secondary" to this other man, and I was fully in love with her and partnered..., I'd have my heart utterly broken and would have to call it all off with her. It's the concept and word that would sting me to my core and break my heart. So I guess I'm saying that I'm only interested in "primary" relationships. However, the term "primary" is redundant and meaningless to me, because I'd never consider entering a loverly relationship as a "secondary".

So, any Sweetie of mine, even if we don't live together, must think of me and treat me as an equal to any and all of her other loves. Otherwise, forget it!
 
Last edited:
When we talk about relationships being equal, my question is equal how? I think that for a partner that's less involved on a day to day basis it makes sense (and is, in fact, critical to one's emotional health) to seek equal status as a person and equal respect BUT that in many (most?) poly situations that does not necessarily mean that it will make sense to go for equal status as a partner. For things like major decision making, vacations, family events, etcetcetc it may just never be feasible to treat everyone equally. Plus, how could all love be equal? That may be the goal, or at the very least it can be a possibility for the future, but how likely is it that, say, a relationship of six months will be equal in depth and connection to a relationship of 12 years?

Yet another scenario. What if your lover was married with young kids. You and the spouse both get dream jobs in different countries, whereas your lover doesn't care about their job. Would you really demand that there be an equal chance that your lover move to follow you, versus moving to follow the other parent of their children? Again, my point is that we can be equal in love and respect but some preexisting relationships are going to be treated differently than any new relationship, at least for a significant amount of time or until significant blending of life circumstances occurs.

I recognize that you are talking about what's right for you, and I would never try to tell you what you should want or accept... I'm not trying to be combative here, just trying to feel out these issues. Because the thing is, we can choose to talk about things using the words primary/secondary or not, but the issues remain.

Kidsoul, apologies again for the threadjack, hopefully you're at least finding this mildly interesting even though it may not be helping you in your immediate situation.
 
It sounds like you've been causing yourself a LOT of hurt in the process.

This is true MorningTwilight! But I've only recently admitted it to myself.

It might not hurt to ask some questions and let husband and wife talk for awhile, ask some more questions, and so on, until you believe you understand where their heads and hearts are at. Then it's your turn, and after they've seen that you're willing to take the time to listen, they may be more receptive to your words.

I can see this as a way to ease into the conversation and start the ball rolling. Also using H.A.L.T. and "I" language are examples of the types of concrete tools that I lacked. And your sample script helped me to start thinking about how to formulate the questions. Thank you for pointing the tools and writing out the script.

DO read the "Secondary Bill of Rights" at the xeromag website.

For those of you that haven't seen it yet, it's located here http://www.xeromag.com/fvsecondary.html#bor
 
Kidsoul, apologies again for the threadjack, hopefully you're at least finding this mildly interesting even though it may not be helping you in your immediate situation.

None required! I'm enjoying reading everyone's responses, and tangents are always a part of any interesting discussion. I can't believe how smart and caring people are on the forum. The advise I've gotten is invaluable. I was headed toward an utter breakdown before I posted.
 
None required! I'm enjoying reading everyone's responses, and tangents are always a part of any interesting discussion. I can't believe how smart and caring people are on the forum. The advise I've gotten is invaluable. I was headed toward an utter breakdown before I posted.

That's so wonderful to hear!

One more small piece of advice on the question of how to discuss the fact that you're hurting without throwing "emotional slings." You want to be fully honest, but balance honesty with compassion. For instance you can say "This has been harder for me than I've been able to articulate, either to you or to myself, and I think it would be very emotionally difficult for me if things continued this way" without using the phrase "roiling cauldron of negative emotions." The former will make her think, the latter will make her feel guilty or even guilted. Keep any dramatic impulses to a minimum and address things calmly and you should be fine. :)
 
I really love that article. There is so much emphasis placed on respecting the primary relationship that I think secondaries do often get treated as disposable. Or that because the primary partner is making such a great allowance for us that we dare not as for anything more.
 
.... but how likely is it that, say, a relationship of six months will be equal in depth and connection to a relationship of 12 years? ....

Your questions are good ones, Annabel. Let me address just this one, for now.

There are many things about which relationships can be equal and unequal. Among these are levels/kinds of commitment to one another. I'm at the "dating" level/kind with FarawaySweetie (FS), so it is not yet time for us to commit to one another on precisely same level as Kevin & I are committed to one another. But I could certainly imagine a not-so-distant future day when FS and I have such a complete commitment to one another as Kevin & I do, despite the fact that Kevin & I have already been together for fifteen years.

[Actually, FS and I have already mutually and explicitly expressed a desire and intent to be committed as life-partners of a particular kind, which is as lifelong intimate & loving friends. This is the very solid footing we are on as we explore the potential of romantic/sexual love as well -- down the road, when our "dating" becomes f2f (rather than digital and telephone). I know that she is with and for me as I am with and for her & him, and in this way she is a partner with me the same as Kevin is my partner (I have only two such life-partners at this time, in explicit terms). So the last paragraph is modified by this one. For there are two kinds of potential commitment at stake here: one sexual/romantic type and the other loving friend type. I happen to be in love with FS in both of these ways, but neither of us can be sure how things may unfold as we continue to "date". What we both do trust is that we are there with and for one another until death do us part.]

I do not love FS less than I love Kevin. In this way we are already dealing with equal love. Indeed, whenever we really open up to love we find that it is always equal, never ranked in status. Love is simply love. Still, explicit -- stated -- commitments are special and extraordinary. The nearest I have to a third life-partner is my straight friend who loves me with cuddles and an occasional kiss, but mainly with his friendship. I love him too, though we have never explicitly bound our lives together as Kevin and FS have done with me.

It is a great comfort to have multiple loves, however they manifest or express.
 
Last edited:
On the above-linked article... It said "The thing that I find a little upsetting, however, is when I see "secondary" relationships treated as dispensable. And worse, the person who is the secondary relationship being overlooked as a human being!"

The moment a person is being "overlooked as a human being" one can be sure that there is not love going on, and therefore not polyamory. Real love is fundamentally intimate friendship, where mutual care is what it is all about. Sex and eros can be a part of that, and it can still be love, but the moment the intimate friendship fails the whole thing is no longer love of loving.
 
Recently I was reading deep into the Old Testament and found a family where a guy had 2 wives (1 Samuel 1):

"Whenever the day came for Elkanah to sacrifice, he would give portions of the meat to his wife Peninnah and to all her sons and daughters. But to Hannah he gave a double portion because he loved her, and the LORD had closed her womb."

Interestingly, Peninnah means, "second."

"Because the LORD had closed Hannah’s womb, her rival kept provoking her in order to irritate her."

Anyway, I've been wanting to post about that for a couple weeks. Just thought I'd throw it in there. Written about 2600 years ago...
 
"One more thing ..."

(homage to the Steve :)

On the livingpolymono yahoo list, a fellow had some profound words on the use of the word "want" versus the word "need." Provided it is not overused, and is not used either as a weapon or to manipulate, "need" can evoke a more sympathetic response than "want:"

"I want to be able to show more affection ..."

vs.

"I need to be able to show more affection ..."

The author advanced the case that the 2nd form was more persuasive by a long, long way.

I'm going to give it a try in my own situation, in fact.
 
Back
Top