Newcomer equality: the opposite of couple privilege

A

Asparagus

New member
Sometimes, it's helpful for me to phrase things in their positive. I was looking for the opposite of couple privilege and came up with "newcomer equality".

Would love thoughts on what that might look like.

My initial thoughts:

Newcomer equality is the right to solve problems in the new relationship without it being affected by or referred back to the way things were done in existing or previous ones. This applies equally to the new member in a group or a secondary relarionship.

What else makes things feel equal and welcoming to you as the newbie in a poly situation?
 
I simply have my own personal boundaries that need to be respected for me to be involved with anyone. I don't need equality with anyone else because I have no need to compare my relationship with someone else's. As long as I am respected, valued, heard, feeling safe to be myself, and can have open communication with someone I'm seeing, how they conduct their other relationships doesn't concern me.
 
As far as I am concerned, being able to solve problems as an equal with your partner and negotiate your relationship is a fundamental part of any decent relationship. People who have this view are often referred to as non-hierarchal. Because why would someone use the word secondary except to make it obvious that you don't have equal say and that your relationship is, and will continue to be, less important. I am not a less important person just because my partner has another, longer lasting partnership.

I don't like referring to it as "newcomer equality" because in many ways my newer relationship isn't "equal" or the same as the other one. I just expect to have an equal amount of power in my own relationship, instead of someone outside of my relationship having more power.
 
I think you'll find a lot of people involved in 'primary' relationships will react negatively to the word 'equality'.

If you haven't already, you might google 'secondary partner bill of rights'. It works just as well as a bill of rights for 'new' partners, imo.
 
I see what you are both saying. And I agree- this is about autonomy and equality within my own relationships- even ones that have pre-existing parts.
 
I think equal =\= same.

What *would* the opposite of couple privilege be?

And I'm thinking more within a triad than a metamour situation.

The reason I'm trying to define this is when you're on the opposite end of a couple privilege situation, often no one sees it but you, and if you can phrase it positively, it's WAY more likely to be received well.
 
"Relationship autonomy"?

Dunno.

BTW, I believe Franklin Veaux and Eve Rickert have updated their "Secondary's Bill of Rights" to be more of a "Relationship Bill of Rights" at this point, based on some of their research into abuse in Poly relationships. I think it's a good distinction, since really they're good tenets (or at least discussion points) for anyone in a relationship.
 
I would say "fairness" is a better term than "equality." "Getting one's needs met" in a r'ship is another good way of thinking about it.


Say you're a parent with a 2 or 3 year old and a newborn. The relationships the 2 children have with you will be different, and not equal. But you'd hope to meet both their needs. The newborn needs to breastfeed every hour. The toddler only needs to eat 5 times a day. You wouldn't attempt to feed the toddler every hour. That would be equal, but unnecessary. Feed both as often as they need, that is fair.

Are you in a new triad? Which of your needs are going unmet? Ask to have them met. Your lover(s) might be unwilling or unable to meet them. What then? Where is your line in the sand, what are your dealbreakers? It's up to you to pinpoint your needs, and decide where to go from there.
 
Privilege is usually the sort of thing that exists regardless of someone's intention to avoid the negative consequences that fall on someone without privilege. I can be very passionate about fighting racism, actively engaged in being an ally to people of color, but I'm still white, and I still have privilege because of it.

Doesn't "couple's privilege" generally mean "primary couple's privilege"? As long as you have hierarchy, there will be privilege. You can be sensitive to how that impacts people without privilege, be aware, but it's still there. The only way to fight it would be to reject hierarchy, period.
 
Really good point, Becca!
 
nycindie said:
As long as I am respected, valued, heard, feeling safe to be myself, and can have open communication with someone I'm seeing, how they conduct their other relationships doesn't concern me.
Click to expand...

I rarely have discussions involving problem solving, negotiating, hierarchy, privilege, etc. because I navigate all of my relationships keeping atuned to what nycyndie cites above. I spent this past weekend with a couple in their home and it was lovely, mostly because they were respectful of my comfort and I was respectful of being in their domestic life. There is nothing inherently oppressive or debasing about being respectful and even deferrential to a couple's relationship. If I am confident and self-possessed, nobody is going to be able to introduce inequality into the situation. There's not much need for equality consciousness or a participant bill of rights when everyone is emotionally stable, mature and has empathetic leanings.
 
Last edited:
I've never been in this situation, but I think if I were entering into a relationship with a couple, or with someone who was already was in a long term relationship, I would not expect to be "equal." I would, however, expect that no one else creates rules about MY relationship except me and the party (ies) I'm involved with. I would not enter into a relationship where someone else had "veto power." I would not "take one for the team" and date/fuck both members of a couple if I was only really into one of them.
 
Re (from OP):
"What else makes things feel equal and welcoming to you as the newbie in a poly situation?"
Click to expand...

I think for me the most important ingredient was feeling like my needs were valued and would be met if at all possible.

Re (from Asparagus):
"What *would* the opposite of couple privilege be?"
Click to expand...

Individual rights? [shrug]
 
As Becca says, I don't think privilege is something that can be done away with that easily or that is under the control of any of us as individuals (or of any individual relationships.)

Here are a few examples of what I think of as couple privilege (ie ways in which society privileges couples):
Invitations to events are almost always for a couple (if you are single your invitation will say "and guest")
Only couples can get married (in many places only heterosexual couples)
As an addendum to "only couples can get married" only couples can take advantage of the many, many privileges in our society only available to married folks.
Couples can hold hands in public without getting the fish-eye (again, in many places heterosexual couples only)
Couples (married or not) don't need to worry about being kicked out of their home due to zoning laws.
Couples (married or not) don't need to worry about losing their children just for the number of people in their relationship
Couples (married or not) don't need to worry about losing their jobs just for the number of people in their relationship
Every romance movie is written for/about couples
Every conventional (in the US) wedding ceremony is designed for couples
Couples won't be kicked out of their religious organization just for the number of people in their relationship
People ina couple are automatically assumed to be stabler, healthier, more reliable than single people of people in larger/networked relationships

I could go on. These are very real "couple privileges" that nothing any of us as individuals can do to change. It will take massive changes in society to undo them.

IMO, when the term "couple privilege" is applied to a specific relationship, what's really being discussed is one of two things:

either prioritizing the couple, which can be reasonable
IE:
My long term partner and I have 6 years together, are part of each others critical mental health support systems, have a kid and a home together, so sometimes I need to put this part of my life first--if it's a choice between the rent money and our date, I won't be able to afford our date. If my partner has a mental health crisis, I may need to be able to cancel our date to be there for him, because these are commitments I made before I ever met you. It doesn't mean I care for you any less, and if something in my relationship with my LTP does force me to cancel our time our will reschedule as soon as possible. I will do everything I can to meet your needs in this relationship. I hope you'll talk to me if you feel these prior commitments are damaging our relationship, and I will understand if you feel you can't be in a relationship with me because of my prior commitments.

Or Treating other people like shit and putting a fancy name on it
IE:
I am his wife, so I will always come first and you can only have time with him when I say you can. If you don't like it, there's the door.


Obviously (I hope) there is a lot of ground between these two extremes, and sometimes we all treat people like shit unintentionally. And sometimes you need to just talk shit out.

But (IMO) if you feel like you need a Secondary's Bill of Rights or a way to explain to people about how you deserve to be treated fairly whether or not you are the newer relationship, then those are probably not healthy people to be in a relationship with in the first place. It is not your responsibility to educate people who supposedly love you about "I am a human being and deserve to be treated like one."
 
HappyFallenAngel, I get what you are saying, but as someone w/ depression & anxiety disorder, in a LTR w/ someone who has bipolar and PTSD, the idea that "emotional stability" is required for a healthy and respectful relationship is rather othering. I don't thnk your intention is to say that people w/ mental health problems affecting their emotional stability DO need equality consciousness or a secondary's bill of rights, but that's kind of how it comes across.
 
JessicaBurde said:
I don't thnk your intention is to say that people w/ mental health problems affecting their emotional stability DO need equality consciousness or a secondary's bill of rights, but that's kind of how it comes across.
Click to expand...



I encourage you to take in the entirety of what I said. I am close with a number of lovely people with ongoing mental health challenges who I would call emotionally stable because they have self-possession, maturity, empathy, reasonable confidence and take responsibility in managing their mental health. In my experience, a health diagnosis of any kind doesn't preclude anyone from the ability to have mutually respectful relationships of whatever stripe.
HappilyFallenAngel said:
If I am confident and self-possessed, nobody is going to be able to introduce inequality into the situation. There's not much need for equality consciousness or a participant bill of rights when everyone is emotionally stable, mature and has empathetic leanings.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I "took in" and completely agree with what you are saying. My intention is not to discuss or dispute your meaning, I am attempting to point out that way you phrased your idea came across to me as exclusionary and ableist. As I do not believe it was your intention to come across that way. I said something so you could be aware of the way it sounded and, if you choose to, could use alternate phrasings in the future
 
I'm part of a long-term couple, and I have had a single straight female FWB for several years. She has recently expressed an interest in moving towards a poly relationship with us, which is fine with us as we both like her and respect her very much. My wife and I have talked about this and know what will and won't work for us. I printed out some basic poly FAQs, and articles about the issue with couple privilege and a secondary's rights, and discussed them with my budding poly friend. We want to be fair and open with her, and want to know what she wants and needs so we can figure out how we can make this work for all of us. Right now we are in agreement, but I expect that all of us will evolve and grow with time and experience. I think we're starting from the right place and attitudes.

I don't know how long this will last, but we will enjoy it while it does. She is much younger than us, but has previously been married and in a LTR as well, so she knows what she wants. Eventually, though, I think she will want to find someone closer to her age, which we think will be good for her when she's ready.
 
Just going to ramble on with a story from a 5, 6 years ago. I'd been with my gf about 6 months and started dating this nice guy, who was going through a divorce. He decided to get himself a hotel room for 2 nights to have some time away... he was still sleeping on a mattress on the family room floor (wife in residence), and had 3 kids.

So he invited me to his hotel room, we had sex, dinner, more sex. A good time. Then my gf texted me to say she'd been unexpectedly laid off from her job (this was during the crash of 2009). I had to run to her, she was freaking out.

My bf got a bit mad when I needed to go. He said he had expected me to spend the night. But, first of all, he hadn't actually invited me (I didn't pack an overnight bag) and secondly, I found out he had an afternoon museum date set up with another woman for the next day! I was a bit miffed myself when I found out he'd planned on going straight from a night with me to a first date with another.:p

Anyway, I guess that is an example of couple privilege.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top