Looking for tips & resources: ENM person dating solo poly person + going down escalator

[amc742]

Hello!

Long-time follower, first-time poster! Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.

I have been dating someone for two years now. We love each other very much and want to figure out a way to stay together for the long term.

I know that I prefer hierarchy in my poly. I want a primary partner that I live with, share finances with, is my first go-to for emotional intimacy, etc. My boo and I were starting to build that over the years, but something wasn't working. I often felt like an afterthought. She couldn't provide what I desired in a primary partner, and she felt cramped and exhausted by our relationship. After some really hard conversations, we both realized that we wanted the other to change. First thinking our issues were related to co-dependency and fear of intimacy, we realized that actually, it's about relationship style. She's more on the solo poly spectrum, and I'm more on the ENM/hierarchical spectrum, and we were defining "partnership" in different ways.

We had some good and hard conversations about this, and we both decided that, after taking a month apart (we're currently one week in, woof! It's hard!) we wanted to come back together and try a different style of relationship, one that is less involved. Labels sometimes aren't that useful, but if it's helpful in this context, I think our new relationship will be as if she was my "secondary," even though I don't currently have a primary. To me, that means having fun and keeping it light, less expectations on how often we see each other, not building with each other's families, no expectations about living together, and being very thoughtful about certain activities and how we navigate shared spaces together (we're queer and share a good amount of friends and community).

So, my questions are:
1. Can folks who have gone down the relationship escalator share what worked well for them, boundaries-wise? Were you able to ease up on them as you worked through the initial de-escalation phase?
2. Does anyone whose poly functions best within a hierarchy have advice on how to be in a "secondary" relationship without having a primary?

Basically, I really want to try this out, I don't want either of us to get hurt in the process, and I want to keep my heart open for other relationships that match my primary needs, while maintaining this gorgeous relationship that I have with my current boo <3.

 

[kdt26417]

Hello amc742,

In order for you and your boo to stay together for the long term, one of you will have to change. Can you be the one? Can you be more on the solo poly spectrum? If not, then she will have to be the one who changes. Explain this to her. Of course, if she is your secondary partner, then you don't have so much of a problem. You are just waiting until you can meet your primary partner. Try and be patient with that part of the process.

Sincerely,
Kevin T.

 

[Bobbi]

When I de escalated I had to let go and mourn the loss of the future I had created in my mind, that was the hardest part. You also may want to redefine what primary and secondary mean to you.

I have 2 primary partners. Life partners. One I share housing and finances with but not bank accounts, although we have one joint for household expenses. The other is solo poly, I don’t live with, share money with, and only see 3 times per week. For me, it’s the depth of the relationship and commitment that determines primary, not milestones or escalator. My escalator looks like 3 steps….dating, partnership, life partnership. most People will not reach step 3. The other escalator things you speak of are individualistic and, for me, are not dependent on where on the escalator the relationship is.

my other partners just aren’t as deep. I can’t explain it but to me a primary is on another level, one that’s hard to attain. Only 2 men have ever reached that level to me and I’m still with them.

Can you just enjoy your relationship without labeling it? You know she’s solo poly which means she probably doesn’t want those things you want but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t want some deep partnership with you, only she can answer that.

you might find another partner that will want to have those things with you or maybe just a couple of them.

why do you want to live together?
why do you want to share money?
why do you want someone to be 1st?
what happens if you get a partner that wants to be 1st but not live with you?
what if nobody wants to share money?

when I asked myself these questions, I found it was monogamy and societal programming (all of my stuff is some form of that, realistically) to look or feel “legitimate” in everyone’s eyes, and I changed my perspective. Now I have 2 number1s who will drop everything to be a support for me, 1 to share a home with, 1 to help out financially, very different men and very different relationships. Both are very important and are priorities in my life as I am to them. Would I like to live with the other? Yes, but it’s not essential and he doesn’t want that. At the same time he recognizes that it may happen in the future. It’s not his preference and our relationship is amazing.

we have 3 days of dedicated quality time that we spend together which is way more that I ever had with anyone I’ve ever lived with. After getting used to the idea, I love not living with him! I’m closer to him and have a much healthier relationship than those I’ve lived with. It’s all about perspective.

 

[amc742]

This is so helpful. Thank you! The language of primary/secondary, all of that, doesn’t fully capture what I’m trying to describe. I’m pretty new to all the language. Basically, I want an anchor that would be the person I turn to for emotional intimacy, and I eventually would like to live with that person, or at least see them half the week. I feel like building a home with someone and seeing them regularly is something that I strongly desire in a primary/anchor person. And I appreciate your reframe: it doesn’t have to be a “secondary,” but more that I do also want an anchor that I share a home with.

It’s encouraging to hear that deescalating is possible, even if hard. It sounds like the set-up you have is very similar to what I want to create for myself.

 

[amc742]

For me, it’s the depth of the relationship and commitment that determines primary, not milestones or escalator.

Can you say more about the depth of commitment, especially with your solo poly primary? By commitment do you mean commitment to communication, emotional support, seeing each other regularly, etc?

 

[amc742]

The other escalator things you speak of are individualistic and, for me, are not dependent on where on the escalator the relationship is.

And by this, do you mean the part about how we navigate shared space, how engaged she is with family, etc?

 

[Bobbi]

Can you say more about the depth of commitment, especially with your solo poly primary? By commitment do you mean commitment to communication, emotional support, seeing each other regularly, etc?

In the context of my relationships, my Primaries are Life partners. We have committed to be together as life partners and discussed each facet of relationships, marriage, and expectations as part of that commitment; People I would legally marry, if I did that. They have to fit my standards of depth of Love, trust with money, compatibility, and healthy communication, etc. that I would demand of a life partner. I’m very picky. With my solo primary, we have a love and relationship unlike any I have had before. NRE is gone and our feelings and depth have just grown beyond anything I could comprehend. He is the first person to ever meet all of my emotional and physical (relating to my body) needs.

I had to work through my programming to be okay with seeing him only 3 times per week as daily was my MO in serious relationships before I met him. And a few other minor things that felt big at the time. But everything with him is deeper. The connection, the love, the sex, the conversations, the affection, the care, the partnership. It’s the first relationship I’ve ever had where I didn’t feel like one person loved the other more.

we are committed to our time together (we have set days we see each other, only changes when something we cannot control comes up); open, honest and transparent communication; being there for each other in need no matter the day or time (we do respect time with other partners) and do prioritize each other. We have met each other’s families and spend holidays together. We travel together regularly and are planning retirement together. We do not live together or share money but when I’m with him, he pays for everything except big travel. (All meals and entertainment. this was discussed at length and agreed between us fairly early on.) I am disabled and have very limited income. I save monthly for our annual big trip.

my secondary partners I love very much and may be with forever but those relationships do not have everything needed, or the depth of love to make that commitment. But I could rely on all of my partners to be there if needed But I would never ask them to drop everything or call them in the middle of the night, if that makes sense. Of course, I’d go to the closest ones first. When I broke my femur earlier this year everyone visited me in the hospital and each helped in there own way when I needed care after hospital.

my hierarchy looks more like orbits. It’s possible anyone can reach the top tier. Up there I have my 2 life partners and my best friend, the next tier I have some of my closest family, close friends, and secondary partners. The third tier is some more family and friends and newer partners. And the fourth is acquaintances, and people I might be dating.

 

[amc742]

Thank you so much for responding Bobbi. I’m mindful of the time it takes to respond, especially for a stranger. The life and structure you have created sounds wonderful. I appreciate your perspective - definitely giving me hope for what is to come with me, my boo, and other future lovers/life partners/etc.

 

[Bobbi]

And by this, do you mean the party’s about how we navigate shared space, how engaged she is with family, etc?

Yes, living together, sharing bank accounts, having kids (im not having any, but it’s an escalator thing that wouldn’t be hierarchy dependent), etc. Maybe I want to have kids with someone who isn’t a life partner but would be an amazing father and co parent, maybe I’ll live with a lower hierarchy partner because he just lost housing for some reason. I remove actions from the milestones of hierarchy. Instead, my hierarchy is based on depth of connection, level of transparency, ease and depth of communication, etc.

 

[MeeraReed]

I very much like Bobbi's replies to you on this!

As a solo poly person myself, I have some thoughts on your situation.

First of all, I'm glad you and your partner figured out what was going wrong in your relationship. Before I understood my solo nature, I had several exes and therapists who viewed me as having a "fear of intimacy," when really, I just needed more alone time and physical space than most people need. (Other exes also viewed me as only useful for casual sex and/or as "not a real girlfriend," due to my solo nature). Meanwhile, I often viewed my dating partners as too needy or having co-dependent tendencies, when perhaps they just wanted more physical togetherness or day-to-day living with a partner than I do.

So it's great that you and your partner identified your relationship style differences and still want to build a relationship in a new framework.

OP wrote:
Labels sometimes aren't that useful, but if it's helpful in this context, I think our new relationship will be as if she were my "secondary," even though I don't currently have a primary. To me, that means having fun and keeping it light, fewer expectations for how often we see each other, not building with each other's families, no expectations about living together, and being very thoughtful about certain activities and how we navigate shared spaces together. (We're queer and share a good amount of friends and community.)

So, my questions are:
1. Can folks who have gone down the relationship escalator share what worked well for them, boundaries-wise? Were you able to ease up on them as you worked through the initial de-escalation phase?
2. Does anyone whose poly functions best within a hierarchy have advice on how to be in a "secondary" relationship without having a primary?

I would ask you to be cautious about all of the above. I am definitely coming at this from a solo poly perspective, so it may not match what your perspective is, and maybe your partner's solo poly style is different than mine, but here is what I want to say:

When I first figured out that I was solo by nature, I thought that being someone's secondary would be my only option in poly. Most people want to live with a partner, and their nesting partner would by default by more important to them & their daily life & future life plans, right? And this was confirmed by my online dating matches, which seemed to be 100% poly married men who were delighted to find someone who would never want to nest, get married, or spend much time with them, because they already had their wives for all that!

Reader, that was not at all what I wanted. I wanted a partner (or potentially more than one partner) who would recognize and value my need for independence and be excited to build a life with me that including living in separate dwellings and seeing each other less frequently than traditional couples do.

You write that you are thinking of proceeding with a new relationship style in which there are "no expectations about living together." If your partner is truly solo in her living situation and future plans for living situations, then actually your relationship would have "the expectation of living apart for all of your relationship." Similarly, rather than "fewer expectations for how often you see each other," would it make sense to create the expectation that you see each other X times per week/month/whatever makes sense, rather than that it is simply a nebulous "less" ?

And if you think living apart forever is a bad thing, consider this: polyamory is all about forming lasting, loving connections between people who do not live together and never will. Unless you have a closed polycule all living together (which sounds complex at best, and at worst a nightmare for many personality types), or one primary couple who do not consider their outside relationships very important, then absolutely, most poly configurations involve long-term love between two people who don't live together. (I guess another poly option would be a poly person who splits their time between the homes of two partners, building a live-in life with each separately, but that still involves time apart when the partner is at the metamour's house. So poly will almost always involve significant time apart, I believe).

For that reason, I believe it's useful for all poly people to understand the solo poly perspective, because it isn't that different from "regular" polyamory, just that the solo person prefers to have no nesting partner at all.

Polyamory/ENM allows for the option of figuring out what you want with each partner, based on individual compatibility rather than expectations of relationship style. If two people love each other, but aren't compatible to live together, whether because of their personalities or because they already have other nesting partners, then they find a way to build love & a life together while living apart. (I would define a solo person as someone who simply isn't compatible to live with ANYONE!)

There is, or used to be, a movement called Living Together Apart (or Living Apart Together?) for happily monogamously married couples who prefer to each have separate homes. (Although this kind of demands they can each afford their own home, which is a different issue.)

ENM also allows for more outside-the-box options: long-distance partners that are physically together infrequently but still love each other deeply, platonic domestic partnerships, such as best friends building a home/household/future together, etc.

And, people who live apart can still make future plans and integrate their lives however they want: moving to live closer to each other, for example, or figuring out some arrangement, like the solo person living in a guest-house or mother-in-law apartment on the same property. You can choose to combine finances, or not, depending on what you want. Living apart, in itself, doesn't mean much other than two people are maintaining two separate households. It doesn't have to mean anything emotionally.

I would also point out that there is a huge advantage to being poly and having no nesting partners. It is so much easier to schedule dates in the home without bothering anyone!

To be continued...

 

[MeeraReed]

Continued:

I would ask you to question why not living together/spending more time apart automatically equates to these things: having fun and keeping it light... not building with each other's families... and being very thoughtful about certain activities and how we navigate shared spaces together. (We're queer and share a good amount of friends and community.)

Having fun & keeping it light seems like an emotional de-escalation, which might be what your partner wants. Or it might be what you need in order to categorize your partnership as in a different relationship style now. But is that actually true or necessary?

I've spent the past 12 years in a deeply loving, emotionally close relationship with someone who lives almost 2 hours away. We began casually and did keep it fun and light for the first year or two.. But then we fell in love and slowly built a serious partnership with regularly scheduled visits, daily phone calls & texting, intense emotional support, and involvement with one another's families.

Why can't you be involved with one another's families? Is that your partner's request, your assumption, or your need for the new relationship style?

Regarding being careful about navigating shared spaces in the queer community: is that because your partner wants more space to date/form connections with other people in your shared community, to not always operate as a couple when going to the same event, for example? That sounds totally fine from a poly perspective.

You describe yourself as hierarchal ENM. Does that mean your preference is for a primary partner, with all other relationships for both of you being very casual, more of an "open relationship" than poly, with multiple loving partnerships? That might be the issue, rather than your partner's solo nature. Does she want more freedom to explore other connections, and you want to be mainly with her?

Is the shift to viewing her as "secondary" mainly because that's the way you need to conceive of her, in order to allow her to date freely in a poly way, and/or to allow you to seek another serious partner of your own who would want to live with you someday?

I would think about that a little. As I said, I used to think of solo poly as meaning I must always be "secondary." I read a definition of solo poly that resonated with me: a solo poly person is their own primary, and all their other relationships are secondary to their main relationship with themselves. This made sense to me and I liked it... but...

Once I had a deep loving connection with my partner Eli, it didn't feel right anymore. We both need a lot of autonomy in a relationship, so my solo nature was not an obstacle for him. He is extroverted and identifies as a relationship anarchist (not solo) but he liked the freedom of not living with a partner, and later formed a platonic domestic partnership with his best friend. He did not have another serious romantic relationship in the whole time we dated, and neither did I, so we did not regard each other as "secondary." He had many more casual relationships, and fell in love a few times, but nothing worked out. He did seek out other serious relationships with the goal of having two serious relationships (me and someone else) in a non-hierarchical way.* But we weren't secondaries to each other.

So. What is it exactly that makes you feel more comfortable in hierarchical ENM? If your connection to your partner is still "serious" and deeply loving, even if you see each other less and understand you'll always live apart, is there an option to be non-hierarchical? If you got another serious partner, would the new partner automatically be "primary" just because they might be more compatible to live with you?

It sounds like you are assuming the new relationship style between you and your partner means there will now be emotional distance between you. Maybe that IS what your partner wants. But maybe it's just your assumption.

Going "down" the relationship escalator does not automatically equate to emotional downgrading. The "relationship escalator" was a term solo poly people coined to describe how ridiculous it is that traditional relationships are assumed to be on an escalator with living together & marriage as the only goal. The point was to REJECT the escalator! You can't go down it if it doesn't exist!

To think about that would be my advice for you.

*Codicil about Eli: this year, Eli finally met another serious partner, and his relationship with me might end, because he suddenly became hierarchical with her, she moved in with him immediately, and he is leaning toward labeling me as secondary. To say that is devastating to me would be an understatement. It has changed everything I believed about him and even about my solo journey.

So, like, don't do that.

 

[amc742]

First, MeeraReed, thank you so much for the time and energy you took to respond to me. There is so much to respond to, and you have given me a ton to think about. I'm going to pick and choose the things that felt particularly powerful / resonant with me.

*Codicil about Eli: this year, Eli finally met another serious partner, and his relationship with me might end, because he suddenly became hierarchical with her, she moved in with him immediately, and he is leaning toward labeling me as secondary. To say that is devastating to me would be an understatement. It has changed everything I believed about him and even about my solo journey.

I want to first say that I am so sorry to hear that after building such a beautiful relationship it has started to crumble because of how powerful the relationship escalator can be. I really hear your pain here. Brought me to tears and I don't ever want to show up that way in a relationship. Thank you for offering that perspective to me.

I would ask you to be cautious about all of the above. I am definitely coming at this from a solo poly perspective, so it may not match what your perspective is, and maybe your partner's solo poly style is different than mine, but here is what I want to say:

When I first figured out that I was solo by nature, I thought that being someone's secondary would be my only option in poly. Most people want to live with a partner, and their nesting partner would by default by more important to them & their daily life & future life plans, right? And this was confirmed by my online dating matches, which seemed to be 100% poly married men who were delighted to find someone who would never want to nest, get married, or spend much time with them, because they already had their wives for all that!

Reader, that was not at all what I wanted. I wanted a partner (or potentially more than one partner) who would recognize and value my need for independence and be excited to build a life with me that including living in separate dwellings and seeing each other less frequently than traditional couples do.

You write that you are thinking of proceeding with a new relationship style in which there are "no expectations about living together." If your partner is truly solo in her living situation and future plans for living situations, then actually your relationship would have "the expectation of living apart for all of your relationship." Similarly, rather than "fewer expectations for how often you see each other," would it make sense to create the expectation that you see each other X times per week/month/whatever makes sense, rather than that it is simply a nebulous "less" ?

Since writing the OP, I have shifted a lot of how I think about many of the things highlighted here. I am now thinking about how can I have multiple, loving, caring, intimate relationships that take up different space and meaning in my life. In particular, your question of me to be specific about expectations around seeing each other is very resonant to me.

I will say that the ask to be flexible and nebulous about when we see each other was an ask that she had of me, not the other way around. But I know for me, moving forward I need some stability in order to feel cared for, safe, and desired. After a bunch of reflecting, I landed that having seeing each other 1-3 times a week will feel amazing to me. I'm hopeful that this will feel good for both of us.

I really like how you frame that we will have an expectation of living apart for all of our relationship. Thank you for that reframe.

would ask you to question why not living together/spending more time apart automatically equates to these things: having fun and keeping it light... not building with each other's families... and being very thoughtful about certain activities and how we navigate shared spaces together. (We're queer and share a good amount of friends and community.)

Having fun & keeping it light seems like an emotional de-escalation, which might be what your partner wants. Or it might be what you need in order to categorize your partnership as in a different relationship style now. But is that actually true or necessary?

I've spent the past 12 years in a deeply loving, emotionally close relationship with someone who lives almost 2 hours away. We began casually and did keep it fun and light for the first year or two.. But then we fell in love and slowly built a serious partnership with regularly scheduled visits, daily phone calls & texting, intense emotional support, and involvement with one another's families.

Why can't you be involved with one another's families? Is that your partner's request, your assumption, or your need for the new relationship style?

These were all coming from me, not from her. For me, when I was framing this shift more in a primary / secondary way, I felt that in order to not WANT to continue to escalate our relationship, I would need to pause and think critically about how we engage with our broader community in our relationship. Especially when it comes to family. My family is very Catholic, and already is pretty homophobic/transphobic and don't know about my GNC gender expression, so adding poly to the mix is something that I'm not currently ready to do. That being said, I appreciate your perspective and I want to think more about how I can lean into the love that we have, and not dampen what we've created because it feels easier.

You describe yourself as hierarchal ENM. Does that mean your preference is for a primary partner, with all other relationships for both of you being very casual, more of an "open relationship" than poly, with multiple loving partnerships? That might be the issue, rather than your partner's solo nature. Does she want more freedom to explore other connections, and you want to be mainly with her?

Is the shift to viewing her as "secondary" mainly because that's the way you need to conceive of her, in order to allow her to date freely in a poly way, and/or to allow you to seek another serious partner of your own who would want to live with you someday?

I think the core issue is that I desire to spend more time with her, and she feels pressured by that. We have different attachment styles too that really exacerbate this push and pull. I have thought long and hard about the ENM versus poly conundrum, and you're right - I have been imagining having an open relationship more than a poly one. But after reading these forums, talking to friends and therapists, I'm excited to explore what it might look like to have multiple loving partnerships.

Thank you again for your response!

 

[amc742]

Hi folks,

Just wanted to give an update for folks who might have been following along.

You write that you are thinking of proceeding with a new relationship style in which there are "no expectations about living together." If your partner is truly solo in her living situation and future plans for living situations, then actually your relationship would have "the expectation of living apart for all of your relationship." Similarly, rather than "fewer expectations for how often you see each other," would it make sense to create the expectation that you see each other X times per week/month/whatever makes sense, rather than that it is simply a nebulous "less" ?

We had our talk yesterday. Ultimately, what we needed and desired in a relationship didn't match up. She really needs a level of flexibility that I can't provide, and was excited about being a "secondary," for what that meant related to time commitment and partnership. Committing to x amounts of time to meet just doesn't work for her. She's come to the conclusion that she doesn't exactly know how romantic partnerships should function in her life. She imagines romance and love to function more like how her friendships do. Sometimes they are intense and you see each other a lot, and other times you can take space, picking up where you left off. I'm clear that I need a certain level of time commitment and stability when it comes to my romantic partners. This was a very hard decision for both of us, because we are madly deeply in love

I'm excited to take a lot a lot of space and imagine what a friendship might look like, or potentially something more, when I've let go of the idea of being her partner. Or neither, who knows. Only time will tell.

I appreciate you all offering your perspectives.

 

[kdt26417]

Hi amc742,

Thanks for updating us. I'm sorry you and your (now ex-) partner were not able to work things out in a way that would satisfy both of you. Perhaps you can still be friends? Who knows.

Much regards,
Kevin T.

 

[MeeraReed]

Thank you for the update. Her view is a bit different than how I do solo poly, but I was more similar to her view in my 20s when I was less settled in life (and I was indeed happy with the idea of being a "secondary" then).