Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 03-10-2010, 06:55 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

http://cdn3.libsyn.com/polyweekly/PW...b9ddf62a2f2b3e

I just listened to this.

Good to hear your voice Joreth. If you are still among us.

It seems that there is no debate between primary/secondary descriptions of relationships and describing relationships as not being of a primary/secondary nature. There are just differing experiences and some things for new comers and sometimes us veterans to poly need to think about. What there is to think about is in terms of prescribing rules/boundaries for new relationships coming into our lives so as to not hurt and/or damage a new person in our lives sense of self, ego and worth.

There were several points made in this pod cast that I wanted to point out.

1. There is a struggle sometimes for people in several poly relationships, where there was no established relationship to start with, to vie for top dog relationship. These folks want to have claim to the primary positions and that can be hurtful and dangerous to all the other relationships.

2. A person entering an established relationship that has been looking for a "unicorn" of sorts sometimes has prescribed rules/boundaries to follow where by the "unicorn (or other)" must fit these rules/boundaries in order to fit. This can be unappealing for a person entering an established relationship and it can be hurtful and damaging to that person to find out they are investing in a relationship of this type of nature.

3. Some relationships that are established, and looking for other partners are compassionate and respectful (two words I love oh so much it made me so happy to hear them!) to new partners and do their best to not have fear attached to the new comer but welcome them and are warm to them in order to make them feel they are wanted and worthy of as much attention as anyone else involved in that relationships life.

4. This fear that some couples have when opening their relationship is often based in their "fear of losing" the partner they have. It is very common in my opinion and seems to be a first step when a couple open up their relationship. As is the assumption that a new partner will meld into the relationship that already exists and will somehow become some version of the fantasy that the couple had in mind.

5. It is important to go with changes in relationships and morph into a future with ones partner and newly established partners. There needs to be respect for established relationships, but not to the detriment of those who have not been around as long. Those people and those relationships are just as valid and vital, just different.

So this is what I got from this... Anything else to add that I might of missed? Any thoughts on how this affects your view of primary secondary?

For me it makes me feel confident that anyone that enters our relationship can feel welcomed and accepted for who they are and what they may bring to our lives.

I still have a primary established relationship that for me means that I take my son as my primary concern and therefore who parents him with me is my primary partner (s). That does not mean that anyone else will be kept separate or be loved any less because of that commitment to raising him. There will be time restraints, but that is it. I can respect that every relationship I have is different from the next and just as valid.

My love may be deeper for someone over another because of that love is more established, but there is no secondary love for me.... in fact I would prefer to say that in light of this new discovery for me I would never have a secondary... only primaries and possible primaries. Going by my own definition of my son being my primary responsibility and commitment that is. (Does that make sense?)
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog

Last edited by NeonKaos; 03-10-2010 at 01:25 PM. Reason: merge posts
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 03-10-2010, 07:51 AM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

This primary/secondary thing seems to have taken me a huge amount of time to understand. I think I get it now. This isn't about labels, this is about treatment. There is an immense difference between referring to someone descriptively as secondary and treating them as such. This is about treatment not labels. This is about treating people as commodities I think. That I get!
I may call myself a secondary within our relationship but I am certainly not treated as being secondary.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 03-10-2010, 01:24 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

I am a little confused about why these things are suddenly obvious after many people have said them over and over in writing on this forum.

Why is it that suddenly that the things she says make sense, when she said the same things already on here (as did other people) and got all kinds of rebuttal?

However, this is wherein the glitch lies:

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
For me it makes me feel confident that anyone that enters our relationship can feel welcomed and accepted for who they are and what they may bring to our lives.

Wording a new relationship as "entering OUR relationship" implies that the new person is of a second-class status. They are not "entering your relationship" they are "starting or having a relationship with you and/or whoever". That's the kind of language construction indicating the subconscious thought-process that leads to "prescriptive" expectations.

I could go on for 10000 characters like Joreth, but I don't see how more words will help if those few sentences cannot be understood.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 03-10-2010 at 01:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 03-10-2010, 03:41 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
I am a little confused about why these things are suddenly obvious after many people have said them over and over in writing on this forum.

.
I didn't actually listen to anything or read anything new. People were confusing me by rejecting the word "secondary" as a label. That is what I found so incomprehensible. A spade is a spade, a secondary is a secondary meaning they impact less in a broader sense. That's just my definition.

I still internaly recognize people with labels just to keep relationships straight in my mind. That doesn't mean I see them as less important as people, just less impacting on the relationship.
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 03-10-2010, 03:50 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
I didn't actually listen to anything or read anything new. People were confusing me by rejecting the word "secondary" as a label. That is what I found so incomprehensible. A spade is a spade, a secondary is a secondary meaning they impact less in a broader sense. That's just my definition.

I still internaly recognize people with labels just to keep relationships straight in my mind. That doesn't mean I see them as less important as people, just less impacting on the relationship.
I was actually responding to what redpepper, who is the OP of this thread, wrote.

Your position on this matter, Mono, has always been crystal clear to me.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 03-10-2010, 03:51 PM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post

Your position, mono, has always been crystal clear to me.
....fades away into the distance
__________________

Playing the Game of Life with Monopoly rules.
Monogamy might just be in my genes

Poly Events All Over
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 03-10-2010, 03:52 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
....fades away into the distance
You responded while I was editing! You're fast!
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 03-10-2010, 03:54 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
I am a little confused about why these things are suddenly obvious after many people have said them over and over in writing on this forum.

Why is it that suddenly that the things she says make sense, when she said the same things already on here (as did other people) and got all kinds of rebuttal?

However, this is wherein the glitch lies:



Wording a new relationship as "entering OUR relationship" implies that the new person is of a second-class status. They are not "entering your relationship" they are "starting or having a relationship with you and/or whoever". That's the kind of language construction indicating the subconscious thought-process that leads to "prescriptive" expectations.

I could go on for 10000 characters like Joreth, but I don't see how more words will help if those few sentences cannot be understood.
Fair enough ygirl, "entering" is not a good word in the context of what you are saying. I was thinking of it in terms of when people say they are "entering" into a new relationship. We would all be "entering" into the relationship, because in actual fact the relationship all around changes when someone comes into it or leaves it.

As to why I didn't get it before? All I heard from others writing about this before was their frustration and anger. Not what they were trying to get across. I also found that there was an assumption around undertanding some key words and concepts that I was not familiar with. Like every human that feels judged and threatened, I struggled to understand and when frustration and judgement towards me came in it was near impossible to. It took taking myself out of feeling that way and finding another route to be able to understand.

Or, maybe I'm an idiot and we should remove this thread as everyone got it and I didn't.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 03-10-2010, 03:57 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
Fair enough ygirl, "entering" is not a good word in the context of what you are saying. I was thinking of it in terms of when people say they are "entering" into a new relationship. We would all be "entering" into the relationship, because in actual fact the relationship all around changes when someone comes into it or leaves it.

As to why I didn't get it before? All I heard from others writing about this before was their frustration and anger. Not what they were trying to get across. I also found that there was an assumption around undertanding some key words and concepts that I was not familiar with. Like every human that feels judged and threatened, I struggled to understand and when frustration and judgement towards me came in it was near impossible to. It took taking myself out of feeling that way and finding another route to be able to understand.

Or, maybe I'm an idiot and we should remove this thread as everyone got it and I didn't.
Thank you for the explanation.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 03-10-2010, 04:02 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
Thank you for the explanation.
Your welcome
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
boyfriends, definitions, defintions, descriptions, equality, equanimity, family, girlfriends, hierarchy, importance, labeling, new dynamics, new relationships, poly singles, prescriptions, primaries, primary, primary/secondary, relationship dynamics, relationships, secondaries, secondary, terminology, unicorn

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 02:52 PM.