Advice for a secondary in a slowly opening marriage

[nycindie]

Originally Posted by AnnabelMore

Wow! I just read a great article that elucidates my thoughts on this issue well, and that may also be of use to your thinking about things, Kidsoul!

http://www.polyfamilies.com/polysecondary.html

Wow is right! That is a great article. That should be posted on the online resources thread.

[kidsoul]

Originally Posted by MorningTwilight

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.

Originally Posted by MorningTwilight

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.

Originally Posted by MorningTwilight

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]

Originally Posted by AnnabelMore

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.

[AnnabelMore]

Originally Posted by kidsoul

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.

[ray]

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.

[River]

Originally Posted by AnnabelMore

.... 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.

[River]

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.

[Magdlyn]

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...

[MorningTwilight]

"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.