Are there people on this forum successfully practising hierarchical polyamory?

T

Tinwen

Well-known member
Hi there,
I've been wondering more and more about hierarchy lately.
[I'm considering whether we should label our relationship as such, but I don't want that to be the focus of this thread - I think I may put more personal details in my blog sometime in the foreseeable future.]

I do mean the kind of agreement where people do have outside lovers but with the clear understanding that the nesting relationship or family comes first, which poses a limit on how much time can be allocated to outside relationships - secondaries, play partners, commets. No option to actually bring in another co-primary.

I know how and why these agreements tend to go wrong. I've lived through it from the "supposed to be secondary" perspective. I know about the ethical concerns of hurting secondaries. I know most of you relgulars' arrangements, and they are non-hierarchical (or poly-fi). Even a few months ago, I was in the camp "hierarchy is not really ethical".

In my real-life though, I see more examples of hierarchy than non-hierarchy. In the bdsm community, it's pretty standard to have multiple play partners, and while it's not realistic never to fall in love, neither does every partner you catch feelings for get on the escalator ;) In the tantric community (which I'm less involved with) the couple is also central. Among the ENM people I know, unless they are the I-love-the-whole-world-and-have-no-urge-to-reproduce kind, hierarchy seems ubiquitous and long-term sustainable, although I'm hardly close enough to most to hear about heartbreak. Most of the few "non-hierarchical poly" people I've known are now monogamous.

I would like to know if there are any people left on this forum practising a rather hierarchical approach to polyamory. What are the boundaries or principles you on hold to? If you've been successful, what helped you?
 
Last edited:
I don't know whether to classify my V as hierarchical, the three of us have a rather tight/closed setup, anyone new would have to wait a while before we add them to our inner circle.
 
Why label it. You can have prioritization without being truly hierarchal. I am a big fan of the escalator since it is easy for me to navigate feelings or entwining. I am ENM (swinging, open, poly whatever you wanna try and label) who happens to fall in love with some of the folks I fuck. I never fall in love without sex, those are friends. That at least gives you an elevator picture view of where I am coming from.

I am very clear about my time and availability. Is this a form of hierarchy, no, its a level of maturity. I can clear convey the times I might be available since I am scheduling my kid, wife, partner, gf (well, this one may be done soon), work and hobbies.

As for primary secondary etc, thats a bit more of the nitty gritty, and again yes, it can work. I have been married to my wife 18 years, together for 25 or 26 years, we own a home, have a kid and she is absolutely the priority, financially and for general time. We are running a household together.

I have been with my partner 4 years, we have a generally fixed day per week based on a coordination of her schedule.

Those schedules took priority over my new soon to be ex gf, who luckily had the same days available that I had available.

If thats hierarchal, then I have been doing it successfully for ... well ENM since 2002, poly since 2009ish (I would have to look at my profile)

What isn't hierarchal in my world is vetos. Is the power to disrupt or cause drama traversing the poly cule. People who drag drama around because they find it fun (ok this isn't a poly problem, but boy there are loads of folks in poly who like to just cause drama)

Honestly, by default, loads of people suck at relationships, they will suck are poly relationships too.
Hierarchal poly can absolutely be toxic, but it doesn't have to be with clear communication, boundaries and expectations.

What would be toxic in my world, is if a new person entered the picture, I suddenly turn everything upside down and ride the NRE wave without regard for my commitments. I see that in the poly space more frequently than I do toxic hierarchy.

My point is simply this, toxic people make toxic encounters, I know loads of toxic RA folks. I know toxic hierarchy (I am at the tail end of being vetoed as I type this). Neither are inherently bad, but the people that suck at relationships make them bad :)
 
@Ariakas Cool, there is someone:)

Maybe that's too hypothetical, but if you weren't vetoed and instead your relationship with GF kept deepening after the first bout of NRE, would you be eventually open to the schedule (perhaps if her schedule had to change) or entertain the idea of coprimary?
 
Tinwen said:
@Ariakas Cool, there is someone:)

Maybe that's too hypothetical, but if you weren't vetoed and instead your relationship with GF kept deepening after the first bout of NRE, would you be eventually open to the schedule (perhaps if her schedule had to change) or entertain the idea of coprimary?
Click to expand...
Primary is an interesting term. My love for my second partner is extremely strong, on par with my wife. However nothing can truly supersede my responsibilities. I suppose I date partners folks so we are all in the same circumstance, we are all keeping fairly regulated schedules so life doesn't overwhelm us.

Between my job, kid, wife, partner, and girlfriend... with a sprinkling of a hobby, I have 0 time to give else where.
My partner has 3 full time partners, and 2 part timers (my wife included).
My gf has a ridiculous schedule with kids sports and her own husband etc.

Each one prioritizes time based on their perceived importance. I ALWAYS expect to come after kids. Next down is the main partner who likely has responsibility with/to.

That said, is there flexibility. Yes, we can arrange or re-arrange schedules, just a lot of communication. I would say my Friday is locked in tight, since my partners' bf only wants that day. So I am forever free on fridays unless I am dating.

To narrow in on the question, with my gf, when we started dating we discussed in detail our preferred dating timeframes (we are both horny) and then narrowed in on the amount of time per week to feel secure. Thats more how I approach it. I have 1 overnight and really one date evening to give. We locked in some times, but its flexible within that to ensure everyone feels secure.

My wife I see all the time, so we lock in date nights to feel good
We partner lives further away so really the only time I can see her is Saturday or maybe sunday night.
My son has soccer monday and wednesday, code ninjas tuesday and I tend to work around 50 hours a week

So, is it flexible, yes, as flexible as my schedule might allow. The likelyhood of me ever having more time to give is low, and if we lasted long enough, at some point we would have had a get away weekend for sure.
 
My husband and I have not been at this very long, but he considers our family to be primary (I am not dating anyone else). We have an elementary-school aged child who is disabled. We also have his elderly dad living with us, who occasionally needs assistance or has health concerns.
My husband currently has one other partner. He was upfront with her at the beginning about what he had to offer. She has kids and a couple of other partners and zero interest in escalation. Weekly dates and the occasional weekend away were exactly what she was looking for. That relationship has been going really well.
He recently went on a few dates with someone else but they decided to stop seeing each other because she is looking for someone who has more time for her and escalation possibilities. It was kind of dramatic, I guess they had some chemistry and so it was hard to acknowledge that they wanted such different things that it just really wasn't going to work, but they did break up.

It's not hierarchical in the sense of having veto power. But I do get input about how many overnights or weekends he has available, budget stuff, and he has occasionally cancelled a date because of something going on at home (e.g. I was super sick one time and asked him to take over parenting duties). I also get first pick for date days/nights because it's really hard for us to get childcare for our kid. It's much, much easier for us to go out individually than together, so when childcare is available we have to take advantage of it.
I think this is kind of the "natural" hierarchy that comes with having shared finances, family obligations, and life circumstances. We're also only "out" to a small number of people--we live in a fairly conservative area--and that limits things too.

We might not always be this hierarchical. Our child will be able to be independent as an adult, and my father-in-law won't live forever, so I anticipate that when we enter the empty-nest stage, we'll both have a lot more time on our hands and more freedom to be flexible in our relationship arrangements. But this is what it is for now.
 
I have the natural hierarchy of financial management, too. So does Puck because he's also married and a home owner. So our N shaped part of the polycule is two couples linked by the "secondary" couple of Puck and I.

Puck and I have been emotionally closer for some time though. Although now I'm living part time with Adam, he and I are rebuilding our connection.
 
Evie said:
I have the natural hierarchy of financial management, too. So does Puck because he's also married and a home owner. So our N shaped part of the polycule is two couples linked by the "secondary" couple of Puck and I.

Puck and I have been emotionally closer for some time though. Although now I'm living part time with Adam, he and I are rebuilding our connection.
Click to expand...
I actually get an almost RA wibe from your descriptions, so I'm surprised you'd name any hierarchy. It shows how "hierarchical" and "practical" sometimes blend into each other.
 
Tinwen said:
I actually get an almost RA wibe from your descriptions, so I'm surprised you'd name any hierarchy. It shows how "hierarchical" and "practical" sometimes blend into each other.
Click to expand...
Practicality is such a huge thing. And if we could all afford it, it would probably more closely resemble that. But our agreements, commitments and responsibilities to legal spouses mean that there is a financial hierarchy.

It's going to be interesting to see how this all plays out if Puck gets a NZ job.
 
Tinwen said:
I actually get an almost RA wibe from your descriptions, so I'm surprised you'd name any hierarchy. It shows how "hierarchical" and "practical" sometimes blend into each other.
Click to expand...
I distinguish between the practical kind of hierarchy and rule-based/prescriptive hierarchy. If you're married to or living with a partner, naturally they have priority in practical matters. But emotionally all partners can still be equal, without any veto power or relationship restrictions from any party.
 
Eponine said:
I distinguish between the practical kind of hierarchy and rule-based/prescriptive hierarchy. If you're married to or living with a partner, naturally they have priority in practical matters. But emotionally all partners can still be equal, without any veto power or relationship restrictions from any party.
Click to expand...
If your outside relationships can't become coprimary in terms of commitment, if you don't offer moving in part time, having a family, everyone having the same say about the living situation and other big decisions, that's a form of hierarchy, and a very painful one for a relationship where love develops to a point of wanting to share a life. Though you may even prefer your newer partner for intimacy, "emotional equality" stops at the step you stop the escalator.
 
My wife and I moved from cuckolding to where she needed more in terms of a relationship. Wifey needs chemistry, friendship and love. Yes, love in and out of the bedroom with that one Mr. Right for her. I knew going in that for this to work for her and I she needed to be the V in a poly hierarchical relationship. With the love and support of my wife and through friendship and support of Mr. Right both helped in my transition to secondary. As primary he and my wife set rules and I was very eager to support my wife and Mr. Right.

Mr. Right introduce one concept that my wife and I never heard the term before. The term was Fluid Bonding. Even after he described it I still looked it up to get more knowledge about it. For those who are curious, here is a great definition- "fluid bonding is a exclusive privilege reserved only for the primary partnership."

By dictating that I (husband) must use a condom, while he does not, "Mr. Right" is using fluid bonding to physically signify that he is the "True Primary" and that his bond with my wife is uniquely intimate and "special." My wife is using fluid bonding as a powerful symbolic tool to signify Mr. Right's "special" and prioritized place in her life. By reserving barrier-free sex exclusively for him, she is physically reinforcing the hierarchy we have all agreed upon.

There must be total communication between all parties. Openness and honesty are mandatory and not optional. Competition between the males for the wife's affection had to end on my part, which I fully consented to.

I hope I articulated some of the dynamics involved.
 
Tinwen said:
If your outside relationships can't become coprimary in terms of commitment, if you don't offer moving in part time, having a family, everyone having the same say about the living situation and other big decisions, that's a form of hierarchy, and a very painful one for a relationship where love develops to a point of wanting to share a life. Though you may even prefer your newer partner for intimacy, "emotional equality" stops at the step you stop the escalator.
Click to expand...
Depends on the kind of partner. If they already have a primary of their own and don't want to ride the escalator with anyone else, or if they're solo poly, it can work beautifully.
 
"Successfully practicing" is also basically impossible to really quantify, imo. We tend to measure relationships by longevity, but that's just one of so many measures. To be successfully practicing hierarchical poly could mean something else as not all relationships are lifetime ones (reason, season, lifetime). Success could be found in any of these if you don't define a successful as never breaking up.
 
Evie said:
"Successfully practicing" is also basically impossible to really quantify, imo. We tend to measure relationships by longevity, but that's just one of so many measures. To be successfully practicing hierarchical poly could mean something else as not all relationships are lifetime ones (reason, season, lifetime). Success could be found in any of these if you don't define a successful as never breaking up.
Click to expand...
I'm fine with that ambiguity and leave room for people to define their own criteria of success ;)
 
Last edited:
Eponine said:
Depends on the kind of partner. If they already have a primary of their own and don't want to ride the escalator with anyone else, or if they're solo poly, it can work beautifully.
Click to expand...
Is that your case? Do you ensure your structure stays what it is by picking people who already have a primary? [Totally legitimate, of course.]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top