"Primary" and "Secondary" -- is it about semantics, logistics, or something deeper?

M

MsEmotional

Member
"Primary" and "Secondary" -- is it about semantics, logistics, or something deeper?

I am married and I have a boyfriend. My boyfriend very much hates the terms "primary" and "secondary" and feels like it delegitimizes my relationship with him to call it "secondary." I don't use the terms, but (given that I have been with my husband for 10 years and I've only known my boyfriend for a month), I don't see my two relationships as being 100% equivalent either.

Since the terms "primary" and "secondary" are offensive to my boyfriend, I don't want to use them. But sometimes there are times when it feels appropriate to refer to some of the obligations that I have in my relationship with my husband (family, in-laws, childcare, finances, household and car maintenance, etc) and it feels weird to have to list them all individually when discussing those generic differences in our relationship stage and level of entwinement.

Does anyone have other suggestions for how to allude to the differences in relationship stage and responsibilities without evoking the loaded "primary" and "secondary" terminology?
 
In my opinion, they're just words or labels. I'd be more interested in why your boyfriend finds it offensive.

Does he feel it cheapens the relationship? If that is the case, then you can reassure him in words and actions that it doesn't, but make it clear that you have priorities towards your children, a 10-year strong relationship and shared finances that will sometimes seem to take priority. Some people prefer to have the term primary attached to that so that the priority can be explained in a simple way if the issue comes up.

Was he previously a secondary in another relationship that didn't go well and is therefore adverse to the word, similar to a PTSD scar?

He may have other reasons. I dunno.
 
As a student of sociology, I've long used the terms in the functionalistic sense.

Like you, the idea that two individuals with whom I'm intimate have to somehow be made "equal" just totally messes up my head. :( The semantic gymnastics necessary to avoid potentially bruising someone's ego in even the teeniest bit suggests that maybe the energy could be better spent with a little personal growth.

Funny thing, though: I've noted that many people who claim to DESPISE hierarchy don't seem to have a problem with differentiating married/cohabiting relationships (husband, wife, spouse, life partner) from everyone else (boyfriend, girlfriend, lover, FWB, LDR, metamour).
 
A lot of people differentiate using nesting partner for their entangled/cohabitating partner, others use anchor partner although I prefer for that to apply to significant non-entangled partners. I just use "husband" and "partner" for mine, although Artist and I have been together much longer than you and your new partner and I think I barely even considered him a boyfriend yet at a month in (but I move very slowly - a month in was maybe two or three dates and not intimate yet, so YMMV).
 
Ravenscroft said:
Funny thing, though: I've noted that many people who claim to DESPISE hierarchy don't seem to have a problem with differentiating married/cohabiting relationships (husband, wife, spouse, life partner) from everyone else (boyfriend, girlfriend, lover, FWB, LDR, metamour).
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that describing someone is intrinsically hierarchical though. I mean, I _could_ use partner for both Knight and Artist, but then I'd just confuse everyone as to who I was talking about...
 
Since the terms "primary" and "secondary" are offensive to my boyfriend, I don't want to use them.
Click to expand...

Maybe "other obligations" or "other priorities" works for him. You could suggest those, but if he doesn't like those either? Rather than keep guessing, you could ask BF what terms he would prefer that do not trigger him.

Let the responsibility of coming up with terms he likes be on his plate rather than yours. Then use those if they work for you. It's part of getting to know him in the dating process. So rather than try guess and guess and guess... just ask him.

You aren't out to get him or anything. But neither do you have to "mind reader" or "carry" him.

Galagirl
 
Last edited:
Shaya said:
In my opinion, they're just words or labels. I'd be more interested in why your boyfriend finds it offensive.
Click to expand...

A lot of people find those terms offensive and dismissive. If you notice, not many of us use them here. I, for one, think this is an atrocious way to refer to loved ones.
 
I've come to the conclusion that some people just like being offended. I agree with GalaGirl. Ask him. Maybe "my husband" and "some guy I've only known a month" would be better for him?

Okay, that was a bit of a joke, but not really. The reality is you barely know the guy. He wants to be a priority? Let me guess. He's always been monogamous. He wants to escalate quickly. He's afraid of being discarded. Well, that last thing is a valid concern, but it's not an either/or thing. Being non-hierarchical doesn't mean everybody is immediately on the same plane. It means they have the potential to be.
 
Shaya said:
In my opinion, they're just words or labels. I'd be more interested in why your boyfriend finds it offensive.

Does he feel it cheapens the relationship? If that is the case, then you can reassure him in words and actions that it doesn't, but make it clear that you have priorities towards your children, a 10-year strong relationship and shared finances that will sometimes seem to take priority. Some people prefer to have the term primary attached to that so that the priority can be explained in a simple way if the issue comes up.

Was he previously a secondary in another relationship that didn't go well and is therefore adverse to the word, similar to a PTSD scar?

He may have other reasons. I dunno.
Click to expand...


It's not just words if other people in the world view secondary and primary as ways to short change polyamory, or to say that one relationship is expendable. Also it treads dangerously close to couple privilege.

And you cannot compare PTSD scars to a relationship that didn't go well. I get the comparison from a person whom may not have a lot of actual dealing in PTSD but as a person diagnosed with it I cannot stand by and watch people go, "oooh I have an emotional owwie, that needs a bandaide, lets call it PTSD". And FWIW my argument on the PTSD comment is NOT in and of its self a PTSD trigger. lol.

He may have reasons that legitimate, he wants to establish something with OP but may not know where he stands and if regardless of history he will be treated with the equality and respect of the primary relationship. And if OP wants to operate at primary secondary that's their prerogative but the new BF should be told that upfront to make clear choices.

If it really is just a matter of terminology and not just "comparing the two relationships" instead o letting the other stand on its own, then i recommend calling one partner and the other lover, and when you two have had more history and make it clear OP (if you want it to go there) that you intend to have them as a partner if the future if they want that, and if you want that.

I'm not a big fan of primary secondary relationships unless all are VERY clear on that its ok, and the terminology doesn't bother anyone. I have been a secondary where i was fine with it, and been a secondary where I wasn't, the difference between the two, the other side of the relationship didn't pretend i was something i wasn't. The called it for what it is, and stuck by what they wanted.
 
Last edited:
I personally don't mind the terms primary and secondary, depending on how they're used, but I tend to avoid using them because I know they do bother some folks.

Secondary is okay if it just refers to a level of less entanglement. It's also okay if the "secondary partner" doesn't mind being "less important" than the primary partner.
 
MsEmotional said:
Since the terms "primary" and "secondary" are offensive to my boyfriend, I don't want to use them
Click to expand...

Then don't. Problem solved.

Ranking and comparing one loved one to another according to your list of 'how to value a human' is not going to sit well with everyone. You've identified someone that doesn't care for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top