Philosophical Type Question(s) about hierarchy
- Thread starter SEASONEDpolyAgain
- Start date
Wow, I thought I was the only one who ever noticed those users.
One would have to be living in a sensory deprivation tank not to.
SEASONEDpolyAgain
Well-known member
There's a certain angel who makes me blue in there
You can say /u/blooangl here.
SEASONEDpolyAgain
Well-known member
I'll let you
Openbook23
Active member
It's a tough question, much more complicated than many people realize (especially on reddit....hmmm...that may be unfair, but still accurate) .
I'm opposed to the idea of hierarchy in principle, but I have to qualify that. I don't think people who are poly should automatically assume that the desire of one partner always outweighs the other. That type of hierarchy is problematic, regardless, because it's dehumanizing and unfair to the other partner. It basically renders anything they might want potentially pointless, and no one wants to feel like that. No one should be in a relationship like that.
However, you can't just erase history and circumstance. I've been married for 6 years and living with my wife since 2013. That's ten years of patterns. Fortunately, we not entangled that much; so we don't have many 'you have to be here on this day at this time because we always do X' issues. We don't have exclusivity on much (a few things we like to do with just us, but they are very specific, like maybe see a certain band whenever they are in town). However, there are still patterns that can get disrupted when new people are added. There are also things she knows about me from years of experience, and because our finances are shared, I have to run big purchases past her too. Is all of that hierarchy? Well, it's at least privilege of a sort.
Being aware of that is important, and I think any charitable partner will understand that it exists and can't be avoided completely. We don't have children, either. Children add a whole different layer to this and we can't sacrifice their good for our own.
So, I do think the poly community needs to discuss hierarchy with a LOT more nuance. It's far more complicated than 'it's good or it's bad'.
I'm opposed to the idea of hierarchy in principle, but I have to qualify that. I don't think people who are poly should automatically assume that the desire of one partner always outweighs the other. That type of hierarchy is problematic, regardless, because it's dehumanizing and unfair to the other partner. It basically renders anything they might want potentially pointless, and no one wants to feel like that. No one should be in a relationship like that.
However, you can't just erase history and circumstance. I've been married for 6 years and living with my wife since 2013. That's ten years of patterns. Fortunately, we not entangled that much; so we don't have many 'you have to be here on this day at this time because we always do X' issues. We don't have exclusivity on much (a few things we like to do with just us, but they are very specific, like maybe see a certain band whenever they are in town). However, there are still patterns that can get disrupted when new people are added. There are also things she knows about me from years of experience, and because our finances are shared, I have to run big purchases past her too. Is all of that hierarchy? Well, it's at least privilege of a sort.
Being aware of that is important, and I think any charitable partner will understand that it exists and can't be avoided completely. We don't have children, either. Children add a whole different layer to this and we can't sacrifice their good for our own.
So, I do think the poly community needs to discuss hierarchy with a LOT more nuance. It's far more complicated than 'it's good or it's bad'.
SEASONEDpolyAgain
Well-known member
I think this is such a nuanced topic though. It depends exactly what you mean. What most people entering ENM mean when they say this is that they're not going to sacrifice what they have for anything new. Sometimes they're naive about that, admittedly.
They mean the desires that impede on the stability and/or progression of their current relationship are secondary to those of their current partner. They mean the desires that directly involve the hinge. They don't mean all desires are less important and the world should view the new partner as less important than the wife. They just mean that they're more influenced by the desires of their spouse should there be a clash of needs.
My problem is that there seems to be a sense of entitlement from this Reddit community and others who share this view. It's like, they think people aren't allowed to feel that the desires of one partner are more important than those of potential or other current partners. It's like they want to control their potential market so they won't run into this problem where some dude thinks his wife is more important than they are. And I say that because it is mostly women Over there (and forums generally).
A few of them (IMO) use masculine names and pictures to try and give their statements a neutrality which i find very interesting. They're aware that there's something gendered about this and want to disguise it because they don't want it to be about their own socialization. This is just my speculation btw.
It's also as if the Hinge's own desires are secondary to both spouse's and the new partner's, too. It doesn't occur to them the new person that the spouse might be offering a lifestyle and relationship that is aligned with more long term goals and therefore, sustaining that relationship is more conducive to their overall happiness. All they can think is what they're owed by someone's else's spouse.
It makes me rate prescriptive hierarchy, in truth.
What they say they want is for everyone who is a nesting relationship, a co-parent or a spouse to admit that they have a hierarchial relationship. That way, they can know you're worthy of not just rejection, but unsolicited critique.
It's a control technique - if I can convince you that you are a bad person by using the right type of stigmatising language, then you'll feel compelled to gain my validation by changing. Either that, or you'll become very defensive or even hostile towards me for making such accusations just because I do things in a way that doesn't suit you.
PS: link the thread when its created. It will be like when "the pod" descended on us.
SEASONEDpolyAgain
Well-known member
To sum up, it's like they think the hinge isn't allowed to want one relationship to survive more than the other, should they have to choose. The problem is, you can't control how you feel. If one relationship just isn't as bigger part of your overall happiness as another, then that's just the way it is.
Yes, that's one of the reasons I latched on to this thread here. I noticed that in some OkCupid profiles. Some people wouldn't date anyone that had kids (like me). And I understood that someone can prefer that; that's fine. I mean, I even expect to see people who are monogamous have a preference for that, as well.
But, what "hurt" me, or hurt my feelings, was that they couched me having a kid within "hierarchy," (actually used the word) and that I was choosing to do this, and I was missing out on them because of my choice. And there's probably an inkling of truth to that, I wanted to have a kid with my partner; I mean, she led the way, but yeah, my choice.
Anyway, yeah, you said it.
Openbook23
Active member
Interesting. Yeah, so in this case, there is a kind of purity test involved, almost? Like, if you make decisions based on what's good for your family, you aren't worthy of poly? I haven't seen that, but I believe you that it exists.
They must be too fabulous for words. If only you could go back in time and make different choices in order to have the honor of experiencing these awesome people.
More than just an inkling, but is it *your* loss? Are these people so wonderful that you shouldn't have "settled" for your partner and child?
Your choice, and also a built-in BS detector against the one-true-polyists.
SEASONEDpolyAgain
Well-known member
The cynic in me says they're mostly single.
Some have probably found relationships that genuinely make them happy but they think that's because they found those rare few "good" people rather than they luckily come across people who are very compatible with what they need.