Hello, I've been in a queer monogamous relationship for 1.5 years. My partner and I are discussing polyamory after they had a fling with someone in another city and are starting to date each other. I am very open to poly, feel suffocated by monogamy, but am at a point where I need to focus on myself and probably won't be immediately seeking out other relationships, while my partner is. I need some stability and am most interested in being "primary partners" considering the history I have with my partner. My partner is more interested in non-hierachical poly, where there are no primary partners ---- how can we reconcile this difference, while I want to valued for the time and commitment we have to each other? Is there somewhere to meet in between?
Advice/Resources on non-hierarchical poly
- Thread starter augenrund
- Start date
Marcus
Well-known member
Now *that* is a very good question.
The trick is to understand the expectations and implications of taking part in a non-hierarchical association vs a heirarchical one. These terms are pretty vague and I would suggest focusing on the specifics if your interest is in living with opposing worldviews and flourishing.
The other issue is in realistically valuing the "sweat equity" of each relationship. It's reasonable to understand that a relationship which has survived traumatic life events would have certain 'natural' connections over one that hasn't.
opalescent
Active member
You might find solopoly.net to be helpful to you. (Sorry no link - my phone is being odd.) The writer talks a lot about her process of being in non-heirachal poly relationships.
reflections
New member
Hello and welcome! 
I agree with Marcus. It sounds like the two of you might want to sit down and talk about what these terms mean to each of you. Gain a better understanding of what they look like and why each of you is drawn to that model. Recognizing the role of "sweat equity," what would look different in each model? If someone was on the outside, looking at your relationship, how would they know you are hierarchical or non?
I am admittedly biased, trying to minimize the role of hierarchy as much as I can as a married woman with two partners. But if you are interested in better understanding why anyone would choose non-hierarchy, then I encourage you to dig deeper into your reasons for hierarchy. What draws you to that model? Feeling special? Feeling valued about all other partners? Feeling secure that you are #1? Something else? Are there ways that you can have those needs met, without using your couple privilege (http://tacit.livejournal.com/578925.html) with your partner to put yourself above others?
I say this as someone who is acutely aware of the privileges I receive in society for many of my identities and as someone who has witnessed the ways that privilege has been used to silence the voices of those with less power.
Just another perspective!
I agree with Marcus. It sounds like the two of you might want to sit down and talk about what these terms mean to each of you. Gain a better understanding of what they look like and why each of you is drawn to that model. Recognizing the role of "sweat equity," what would look different in each model? If someone was on the outside, looking at your relationship, how would they know you are hierarchical or non?
I am admittedly biased, trying to minimize the role of hierarchy as much as I can as a married woman with two partners. But if you are interested in better understanding why anyone would choose non-hierarchy, then I encourage you to dig deeper into your reasons for hierarchy. What draws you to that model? Feeling special? Feeling valued about all other partners? Feeling secure that you are #1? Something else? Are there ways that you can have those needs met, without using your couple privilege (http://tacit.livejournal.com/578925.html) with your partner to put yourself above others?
I say this as someone who is acutely aware of the privileges I receive in society for many of my identities and as someone who has witnessed the ways that privilege has been used to silence the voices of those with less power.
Just another perspective!
FallenAngelina
Well-known member
You don't want to be valued for having put in time, you want to be valued and cherished for who you are. When you are filled with self respect and esteem, others close to you will highly value you as well. No labels, tags, books, agreements or negotiations necessary. If you want others to value you, know what you are worth - it's really that simple.
Last edited:
Hierarchical and nonhierarchical seem like binary opposites to me: One can have one or the other but not both. At least in this case? One partner wants there to be "primary partners," the other wants there to be "no primary partners." How can there be, sort of primary partners, but sort of no primary partners, at the same time?
Can you agree not to use any hierarchical labels? just base your relationships on what you'll do, rather than what you'll call it?
Can you agree not to use any hierarchical labels? just base your relationships on what you'll do, rather than what you'll call it?