From the context of your post or posts it sounded to me like you said you didn’t understand the mindset where you would “ want “ to love one person more than another ...ie hierarchy based poly. It seemed like you were trying to illustrate the difference in thinking in general terms of a poly person vs mono person thinking .
My thought or point is dumps those 2 labels ( mono / poly ) and looks at this from a purely human behavior side. If we remove all the outside factor / entanglement/ commitments / marriage contracts and go strictly off desire and chemistry and overall compatibility probably lots of polycues or tribes would be realigned In a nesting sense. Dont you think? I know of many that have done that just because ...and the because is never super specific but rather “ fell out of love “ . And if youre being a good hinge and or being a good participanting partner in a marriage how’s that happen ? BUT it does. Is it something to fear or place in a risk assessment matrix I don’t know. Is it something to consider ...yes I think so.
Dragging this off of
@Arc's blog because if we're not careful
@dingedheart and I may end up monopolizing it and I don't want that (though I don't mind debate here, if
@dingedheart or anyone else wants to chime back in).
So yeah. I can definitely understand *being* in a relationship that looks, from the outside, like hierarchical poly - more life entanglement with one partner, nesting, kids, finances, whatever. I live that! And there are may people who would say that there is an intrinsic hierarchy no matter how much I might want there not to be. I can understand why they would think that.
And, too, I can understand having feelings that are, in fact, stronger for one partner than another, as a description of your personal truth right now. I'm not going to pretend that if I met someone (in nonPlagueWorld) tomorrow and we started dating, no matter how instantly in NRE I felt, that those feelings or relationship is stronger or "more" than the relationships I have with my current partners. Potential? sure. But not more, nor even equal yet.
But the part I *don't* understand, cannot understand right now, is the desire to ensure that hierarchy remains the same, if people would in fact be happier elsewhere. I don't think it's possible to predict one's life to that degree, for one, so I don't entirely understand *fearing* change because I assume it will happen. Five years ago I would never have predicted Joan would ever live with us (or anyone would, though the idea got tossed around a bit with HipsterBoy as a long term plan). Ten years ago I would have never predicted that I'd love someone who wasn't Knight as intensely as I do - I honestly didn't feel myself capable of it. (So yeah, my flirtations and liaisons at that point were very much in the hierarchical vein back then).
So it is *possible* that I may fall in love more deeply with Artist than Knight, though I do not believe that will happen. It is even *possible* that I may wish to live with him (although I think it is far more likely that I would want to live on my own and just date, if ever I do not live with Knight). But I can't say I *want* that to happen OR not to happen - I want to live my life as it comes to me, as I feel it at the time, not as my past self thought I should.
I'm more than a bit of a relationship anarchist. As I mentioned on Arc's
blog, I love my partners equally but I'm *pretty* sure I'm more compatible in a nesting sense with Knight. I think that would still be true even if we decided that our romance had come to an end - we're still best friends, still good life partners, and there's no reason that life partner and romance partner absolutely need to be the same person. Maybe for some people that rearrangement would happen, in the absence of practical concerns - but isn't more happiness for more people a good thing? (Probably there would be a few people unhappy, the world is not so perfect as to make everyone end up with the perfect partner(s) for them, but still.)
I know outside of what I may choose, if Knight ever decides that he would be happier without me.... well. There are a lot of practical entanglements to dissolve, but as for general romance? ee cummings said it far better than I (although as with much love poetry it doesn't entirely work in a poly context):
it may not always be so; and i say
that if your lips,which i have loved,should touch
another’s,and your dear strong fingers clutch
his heart,as mine in time not far away;
if on another’s face your sweet hair lay
in such silence as i know,or such
great writhing words as,uttering overmuch,
stand helplessly before the spirit at bay;
if this should be,i say if this should be—
you of my heart,send me a little word;
that i may go unto him,and take his hands,
saying,Accept all happiness from me.
Then shall i turn my face,and hear one bird
sing terribly afar in the lost lands