Primary/Secondary: Merged Threads, General Discussion / Debate

[ThatGirlInGray]

While I would never want someone who is not-a-primary to be seen as "less" (and yes, that card is all kinds of wrong. Especially the pregnancy one) for me there are just some things that apply to what I consider to be my "primary" relationship that don't apply to my other relationship. Does that mean I have a hierarchy? Well, yeah, sorta. Besides the fact that Monochrome (hubby) and I live together, have children together, own property together, etc. while TGIB (partner) and I don't and do not plan to, there's also:

- looking for a job. I would expect Monochrome to discuss it with me if he wanted to job hunt outside our current location. While it would be nice if TGIB let me know before he did something similar, it would just be a heads up. I would not expect to have any input or for him to consider me or my family in his decision making process.
- similarly, moving. Monochrome and I decide together where we live and if we want to try living somewhere else. While I would be thrilled if TGIB was willing/able to move also, I wouldn't expect it.

TGIB and I were talking about this recently and the thing is I DO consider him a primary, as far as my commitment and emotions go, but it's a different kind of primary. I certainly don't consider him less of a human being or respect his wishes any less. I want him around all the time and a major part of my life, but because of the ways we specifically are NOT blending our lives (at least for the foreseeable future) I don't ("can't"?) consider him a "co-primary".

Do the labels matter? No, probably not, as long as everyone involved is on the same page, but if it were to ever come right down to it, assuming I still loved them both and I had to choose for some god-unknown reason? Well, it would suck beyond words. Like people who live together for a long time and then break up, just because you never technically got married doesn't mean the break up hurts any less than a divorce. But the plan is for both of my relationships to be for the rest of my life, so ohdearlord I HOPE I never have to face that choice!

(This post was triggered by a comment someone made elsewhere about it seeming like there's still a tendency to preserve/protect the marriage by putting it first, implying that this maybe wasn't "true" poly. Well, maybe it's not, but my commitment to my husband was made first, and as long as I still love him I intend to uphold the promises I made to him. I never planned or expected to be in a long-term relationship with 2 people at the same time, so I think we're all doing an ok job of figuring out what works for us as we go, and this thread seemed to be the most appropriate place to put my thoughts.)

(Also, writing this gave me a headache. I don't like thinking about this aspect but it's part of our reality.)

[ThatGirlInGray]

While it's quite possible this quote came from this thread to start with, I came across it in the Definitions thread and wanted to add it to my previous post.

Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat:

"prescriptive" secondary basically means you're "not allowed" to ever become more than a secondary, you'll never be as valued as the primary, and if your relationship ever becomes "too threatening" to the primary relationship, you're out the door.

Compare to "descriptive" secondary, where it's more like you just happen to have your life not as entangled (i.e. your partner has a wife with kids together, shared bills, and a joint mortgage) so the "secondary" status just describes the nature of your current relationship, without forcing it in a box that says it will never be allowed to become something more.

Huge distinction there. Helps my headache a lot!

[polyq4]

In our Quad right now my GF is my secondary. However there has been talk about the 4 of us moving together. She is secondary because I share or house with my wife. If we all moved together, I would no longer consider her a secondary. They would all (3 of them) become primaries.