Polyamory.com Forum  

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

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #221  
Old 02-19-2012, 06:56 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,375
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drtalon View Post
...when you're living with partner(s) and have responsibilities around money and basic survival, it's necessarily more involved than a partner you don't share those things with. I'd really like to see labels built around those differences instead...

"Hi, new friend! This is my partner, Jack, and my partner, Jill, who is also my _______________ because we own a house together." (or raise kids together, etc.)
So, why can't they all simply be called partners or SOs? So, they all differ in what responsibilities you share with them, and the needs they meet for you. Why is it necessary to inform everyone you meet which one does what with you, unless someone specifically asks?
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 02-19-2012, 03:37 PM
drtalon's Avatar
drtalon drtalon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nycindie View Post
Why is it necessary to inform everyone you meet which one does what with you
I don't think it's necessary, but some people believe they are, or do it because it's the example they've learned from. I think if some people need labels, then labels based on "which one does what with you" are better than labels based on hierarchy.

So, instead of "Hi, this is my primary, Jack, and my secondary, Jill," one could say, "Hi, this is my money-honey, Jack, and my girlfriend, Jill."

Last edited by drtalon; 02-19-2012 at 03:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 02-19-2012, 04:26 PM
RfromRMC's Avatar
RfromRMC RfromRMC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Raleigh/Durham, North Carolina
Posts: 239
Cool moving away from partner hierarchy

My views on this are constantly evolving and changing.
I used to assume "primary/secondary" was THE way to handle it all. But the more I date and try to live a poly lifestyle that fits me, I don't think those phrases work anymore for me.

In fact, lately I don't even use the word "partner" any longer!
I'm saying "boyfriends" instead these days simply because it just feels better to me, as a poly who is actively dating but lives alone.
I say I have a "regular" boyfriend (i.e, "regular" as in we see each other on a regular basis), plus any semi-regular and/or occasional boyfriends.
Those phrases are working for me right now. The words do not designate a hierarchy necessarily, but they do reflect the amount of time that I spend with the person (which is a result of many varying factors).

I imagine eventually I will want to settle in and live with someone as a "primary" or whatever, but will probably not use that term, either. I will probably prefer "Domestic Partner". (Or maybe just husband. LOL)
__________________
Just Rob now. That's all. .


In North Carolina? Check out: facebook.com/ncPoly
In Raleigh/Durham? Check out www.meetup.com/TrianglePolyamory

Last edited by RfromRMC; 02-19-2012 at 04:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 02-20-2012, 05:57 AM
MonoVCPHG's Avatar
MonoVCPHG MonoVCPHG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: In Redpepper's heart
Posts: 4,742
Default

I always find the distress brought on by the term primary or secondary confusing. I also always say the same thing; not all relationships have the same impact on a persons life. In fact there is almost always one that has more. That is the primary or central relationship in my opinion."
There seems to be a lot of insecurity in being bothered by these terms. And that's coming from the mono guy who, in a poly environment, is riddled with apparent "insecuritues".
__________________

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

Poly Events All Over

Last edited by MonoVCPHG; 02-20-2012 at 06:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 02-20-2012, 06:08 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
I always find the distress brought on by the term primary or secondary confusing. I also always say the same thing; not all relationships have the same impact on a persons life. In fact there is lamost always one that has more. That is the primary or central relationship in my opinion."
There seems to be a lot of insecurity in being bothered by these terms. And that's coming from the mono guy who, in a poly environment, is riddled with apparent "insecuritues".
you are not a secondary Mono... I treat all of you the same regardless of what you say... maybe that is why you feel no pain when it comes to being a secondary, because its in your eyes only. I could start treating you as less important, totally expendable and not worthy of boundaries and having your needs met. Then I would suggest you would see the difference.

I sound pissy, not meaning to sound so to you Mono, just having a hard time tonight and kind of frustrated with that.

I don't even have a central partner really. Other than myself. We operate as a team, all of us. There are some peripheral loves, but they are not secondary to me. Some of them aren't even partners. I just love them and they love me. No need to clarify the rest really.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 02-20-2012, 02:32 PM
nouryia's Avatar
nouryia nouryia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 206
Default

I don't really like the term secondary, but I'm not sure peripheral is any better. In fact, I don't like labels at all, I struggle with them...

Using such labels is one way to help differentiate those mates you live with from those you don't and can be helpful when explaining things to others but I find the term secondary sort of demeaning and I don't like to think of myself (or my boyfriend) as 'secondary'.

Such labels don't describe my feelings at all...my boyfriend does not feel like a secondary love. I love my husband AND I love my boyfriend. Logistics and life's circumstances do come in the way of being able to live together as mates, but it sure isn't for lack of love or want.
__________________
I tried being reasonable. I didn't like it. ~Clint Eastwood~
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 02-20-2012, 03:35 PM
dingedheart dingedheart is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,279
Default

Central vs primary... a distinction without a difference. Same as all the other words before.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 02-20-2012, 04:01 PM
Mya's Avatar
Mya Mya is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 341
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RfromRMC View Post
I will probably prefer "Domestic Partner".
From all the different suggestions to replace primary/secondary I think this is the only one I could see myself using if I had to start using some kind of distinction. If you're just trying to say you live with someone and not with someone else, the one you live with could be your domestic partner. I like it. It doesn't suggest hierarchy. And about "central partner"... That's no different than primary in my opinion. It still suggests that someone is more important than the others.
__________________
Living with Hank (partner) and rory (ex-partner/friend), also dating Ray
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 02-21-2012, 12:51 AM
nycindie's Avatar
nycindie nycindie is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Big Apple
Posts: 7,375
Default

Basically I see anyone I am with as lovers, so I've adopted a term after SourGirl suggested it to me: lover-friends. I really like that.
__________________
The world opens up... when you do.

"Oh, oh, can't you see? Love is the drug for me." ~Bryan Ferry
"Love and the self are one . . ." ~Leo Buscaglia "
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 02-21-2012, 12:59 PM
Tonberry Tonberry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,383
Default

I like primary better. I feel it's easy to understand having more than one primary, or none and only secondaries, but the idea of someone being central seems more exclusive to me. And how do you have a periphery without a centre? Plus the only central person should be yourself.
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 11:35 PM.