Question: how do folks refer to a "primary" that has not been romantic for a long long time?

[joegkayak]

Hey,

I've been learning so much about polyamory. I'm going through the Polysecure book now. It's really impactful.

I still have lots of work to do on defining what I want/hope for.

Question, though... My wife and I have not been romantically involved for well over 15 years. The reasons don't really matter, but fall into predictable categories of life, kids, health, changes, etc.

I am sole provider and will likely remain so. We are good friends, co-parents, etc. While the easiest thing might be divorce, we just can't afford that, and realize that we'd be better off if we could find a path to basically being roommates and each other's support system.

Of course, this is all very loaded. She has strong structural attachments to marriage, etc.

I guess my questions relate to:
1. Is there a "term" for when the primary is non-romantic in nature?
2. Does any of this even fall under polyamory category?

Any other thoughts?

 

[Tinwen]

Hi,

I don't think there is a special term. If I understand you correctly, I think most people would call what you have a sexless marriage. I think it is ok to continue to refer to your spouse as "my wife" when talking to potential partners, because that's what she is. You can confide that you are more like roommates and co-parents, if your wife is ok with revealing that much.

You don't mention having other partners yet, but if you do, I think it falls under the polyamory category. Love has many forms. For me, personally, I would still count what you have with your wife as one of them.

 

[LaminarFlow]

If you are co-habitating, you can say you have a nesting partner that you don't date anymore. Easy to understand for all the poly folks out there.

 

[joegkayak]

Thank you so much. What I am loving about this community is the non-judgmental acceptance and understanding of these situations. Wherever I speak with friends about the situation, their first solution is divorce, which is not our desired path, as it would be devastating for so many reasons.

 

[Magdlyn]

As long as you and your wife really get along, and wouldn't have jealousy issues if/when either of you started to date others, I think it's fine to continue as roommates. There are a goodly amount of poly people out there who no longer have sex with their nesting partner, or even romance.

A guy I once dated continued to live with his wife after she came out as a lesbian, since they had a small working farm (goats, etc.), and two school-age kids, and it was more about the whole homestead than just a lack of sex/romance between them. In fact, as I recall (this was a while ago), they may have gotten divorced, but still continued to live together, and eventually the wife's new female partner moved in with them.

Again, as long as you have a good friendship, and can be mature about each other's lives dating others, you should be okay.

Now, how "out" you two can be as poly, while remaining married-- maybe your wife will have problems with that, if she wants to appear conventionally married. What's going on there?

 

[Bobbi]

Thank you so much. What I am loving about this community is the non-judgmental acceptance and understanding of these situations. Wherever I speak with friends about the situation, their first solution is divorce, which is not our desired path, as it would be devastating for so many reasons.

My nesting partner (NP) and I went through this with family, as well. His dad couldn't see why we would still live together and not just divorce and finalize that split. His mom understood the costs involved and got it immediately. We are not romantic or sexual, and are more like roommates and friends, but we are still very much financially intertwined, as he is a majority of my support. It allows us both to keep our standard of living and enjoy our lives both together and apart.

 

[kdt26417]

Hello Joe,

I wouldn't make it overly complicated, I would just say, "long-time platonic primary." That would work as a label, as all labels are shorthand for somethings much more unique and detailed.

Just some thoughts,
Kevin T.

 

[joegkayak]

Well, just for fun... I am responding to this thread while on a little solo kayak campy trip on Casco Bay in Maine (Portland) listening to ocean while reading.... Polysecure!

My "nesting partner" and I are taking it very slow while we both learn about this model and think through the various things to consider. We are both growing alot and learning so much about attachment styles, etc.

Once our youngest son graduates high school in June, we will negotiate how we want to let our sons know about our decision. Then I will likely look to start dating... If I can even meet someone who is open to that model. Portland is definitely NOT New York!

My partner has no interest in dating herself, so itt will be just me. Does that equate to "solo-poly"?

I'm sure my starting to date will bring up a lot more stuff to be worked through as there are a lot of security attachments that come with me being the primary source of income.

I feel like I have so much more to offer someone and explore with another person or persons. Time will tell... Easy does it and one day at a time.

 

[joegkayak]

If you are co-habitating, you can say you have a nesting partner that you don't date anymore. Easy to understand for all the poly folks out there.

Wife really likes that term nesting partner. Feels very gentle and supportive.

 

[Magdlyn]

Well, just for fun... I am responding to this thread while on a little solo kayak campy trip on Casco Bay in Maine (Portland) listening to ocean while reading.... Polysecure!

My "nesting partner" and I are taking it very slow while we both learn about this model and think through the various things to consider. We are both growing alot and learning so much about attachment styles, etc.

Once our youngest son graduates high school in June, we will negotiate how we want to let our sons know about our decision. Then I will likely look to start dating... If I can even meet someone who is open to that model. Portland is definitely NOT New York!

But it's not that far from Boston, where alternative love styles are more common than in many other areas. Somerville, MA (next town over from Boston) even allows three people on a baby's birth certificate if there is a poly arrangement.

My partner has no interest in dating herself, so it will be just me. Does that equate to "solo-poly"?

No, it would be mono/poly, where you're practicing polyamorous-style relationships, and she's content with just one partner, you.

A solo poly is a person who generally doesn't live with any of her partners, and doesn't claim any of them as her primaries, secondaries, etc. They are just her partners, whether they are local, long distance but see each other often, or people who only come into their lives X times a year (like "comets") and then go away again. A solo-poly person is more likely to practice relationship anarchy, where all people in her life, family, friends, lovers, are given consideration and do not take precedence over each other by default, but more by need or desire.

I'm sure my starting to date will bring up a lot more stuff to be worked through as there are a lot of security attachments that come with me being the primary source of income.

I feel like I have so much more to offer someone and explore with another person or persons. Time will tell... Easy does it and one day at a time.

 

[joegkayak]

But it's not that far from Boston, where alternative love styles are more common than in many other areas. Somerville, MA (next town over from Boston) even allows three people on a baby's birth certificate if there is a poly arrangement.

No, it would be mono/poly, where you're practicing polyamorous-style relationships, and she's content with just one partner, you.

A solo poly is a person who generally doesn't live with any of her partners, and doesn't claim any of them as her primaries, secondaries, etc. They are just her partners, whether they are local, long distance but see each other often, or people who only come into their lives X times a year (like "comets") and then go away again. A solo-poly person is more likely to practice relationship anarchy, where all people in her life, family, friends, lovers, are given consideration and do not take precedence over each other by default, but more by need or desire.

Very helpful. Thank you!

 

[Bobbi]

My partner has no interest in dating herself, so it will be just me. Does that equate to "solo-poly"?

No, it would be mono/poly, where you're practicing polyamorous-style relationships, and she's content with just one partner, you.

Joegkayak, keep in mind mono/poly describes when one partner chooses not to have other partners, but the other has more than one partner. Both people in this relationship are practicing polyamory, regardless of whether they are dating others or not.

 

[joegkayak]

The fact that there is no dating/intimacy involved at all with my “nesting partner” is what confuses me a little in regards the “amorous” part of the “polyamorous” part.

But no worries. just a new language.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

The fact that there is no dating/intimacy involved at all with my “nesting partner” is what confuses me a little in regards the “amorous” part of the “polyamorous” part.

But no worries. just a new language.

I actually agree. If you're not actively in an intimate relationship, then it's not really polyamory. It's just you sustaining your platonic marriage while you try and form new relationships. I do think for it to be polyamory that the married couple is doing, they have to be engaged in a romantic, intimate relationship. Notice I didn't say sexual.

Anyone will tell you that dating someone who is in a dead marriage is very different to dating someone who is actively poly. One of the most common things that occurs is that when the dead marriage can finally be over, the person wants monogamy. Polyamory made sense when it came to sustaining the dead marriage, but it doesn't make sense otherwise.

 

[Tinwen]

Yes, that is a good question. If the marriage was over, would you want to be monogamous again?

 

[LaminarFlow]

I actually agree. If you're not actively in an intimate relationship, then it's not really polyamory, it's just you sustaining your platonic marriage while you try and form new relationships. I think for it to be polyamory that the married couple is doing, they have to be engaged in a romantic, intimate relationship. Notice I didn't say sexual.

Does this only apply to people who do poly by circumstance? Because for a person who identifies as poly as an orientation, with the exact same scenario, it would still be poly, but seen as saturated at one, I assume?

Anyone will tell you that dating someone who is in a dead marriage is very different to dating someone who is actively poly. One of the most common things that occurs is that when the dead marriage can finally be over, that person wants monogamy. Polyamory made sense when it came to sustaining the dead marriage, but it doesn't make sense otherwise.

In this case, I would still be poly, even I were not dating a nesting partner and wanted to focus on the family for now. Does that make it less polyamorous due to my structure? Is it only when you come from a mono-normative dynamic when you have to transition?

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

Does this only apply to people who do poly by circumstance? Because a person who identifies as poly as an orientation with the exact same scenario it would still be poly, but seen as saturated at one I assume?

Sorry, what do you mean by this? How does it relate to someone in a dead marriage wanting to sustain it for the practicalities while having romantic/sexual relationships with others?

In this case, I would still be poly, even I was not dating a nesting partner and wanted to focus on the family for now. Does that make it less polyamorous, due to my structure? Is it only when you come from a mono-normative dynamic that you have to transition?

I still don't know what you mean. What I was saying is that I find people who use polyamory as a way to sustain a dead marriage usually want to be monogamous once the need to sustain the marriage is removed. So, once the kids move out, or whatever they were waiting for to split.

Polyamory, in that instance, is a temporary solution to a impermanent problem. When you no longer have to navigate around the obligations/commitments of the marriage, your partner not being as available as you are now is often not as attractive. All the downsides of polyamory seem too much when you could just have a normal relationship with someone now.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

Yes, that is a good question. If the marriage was over, would you want to be monogamous again?

IME, right now, a lot of people will say no. That's often because they really can't envisage what being unmarried was like. They can't remember and know it will be different to before marriage anyway. They're probably a parent now. They have financial commitments etc.

That's why for me, in most phases of my life, the "dead marriage polyamorist" has either been a mistake for me, or I've given them a wide berth. They're much easier to assess for real compatibility when they're properly separated; that goes for their compatibility with polyamory and with individuals.

 

[LaminarFlow]

Sorry, what do you mean by this? How does it relate to someone in a dead marriage, wanting to sustain it for the practicalities, while having romantic/sexual relationships with others?

When marriages start as poly/poly or mono/poly, but eventually they stop dating, or have no other partners at that point in time, outside their dead marriage, because they're tending to focus on other obligations, e.g., family or work, does it mean it's also not polyamory as you stated: "If you're not actively in an intimate relationship, then it's not really polyamory. It's just you sustaining your platonic marriage while you try and form new relationships"?

But do you consider that only when a couple hasn't transitioned from mononormavity yet?

I still don't know what you mean. What I was saying is that I find people who use polyamory as a way to sustain a dead marriage usually want to be monogamous once the need to sustain the marriage is removed, so, once the kids move out, or whatever they were waiting for to split.

Yes, so before transitioning.

Polyamory, in that instance, is a temporary solution to a impermanent problem. When you no longer have to navigate around the obligations/commitments of the marriage, your partner not being as available as you are now is often not as attractive. All the downsides of polyamory seem too much when you could just have a normal relationship with someone now.

Think it depends on the approach of how you go about polyamory. If one has a good friendship and co-parentship already, and are not neglecting the household for a New Partner, I see no issue.

If one wants to have a good support system with a nesting partner, it doesn't matter what their structure is. Even as a platonic roommate nesting partner, you go through a transition of some sort and decide you want to commit.

 

[SEASONEDpolyAgain]

When marriages start as poly/poly or mono/poly, but they eventually stop dating, or have no other partners at that point in time, outside of their dead marriage, because they are tending to focus on other obligations, e.g., family or work, does it mean it's also not polyamory as you stated: "If you're not actively in an intimate relationship, then it's not really polyamory. It's just you sustaining your platonic marriage while you try and form new relationships"?

But do you consider that only when a couple haven't transitioned from mononormavity yet?

Yes. So before transitioning.

Think it depends on the approach of how you go about polyamory. If one has a good friendship and co-parentship already, and not neglecting the household for a New Partner, I see no issue.

If one wants to have a good support system with a nesting partner, it doesn't matter what their structure is. Even as a platonic roommate nesting partner, you go through transition of some sort and decide you want to commit.

Polyamory is having, or potentially having, multiple intimate relationships, right? (Or multiple romantic relationships, loving relationships, however you want to say it.)

If you're in a dead marriage, you have no intimate/romantic relationship. It's might be loving, but that's platonic. So if you get a romantic partner outside your loving relationship, you have one romantic/intimate relationship. Not more than one.

You may well be open to having other partners, too, so you have your platonic marriage that has no intimacy or romance. Then you have, say, three other romantic/intimate relationships. Yes, you could say you're poly, if that's what you're open to, or that's what you have.

However, in my experience, those relationships are usually compatible with the person in a dead marriage. They terminate when that marriage is over, as availability shifts. So while I acknowledge that it meets the definition of polyamory, I still don't trust that person is long-term poly-compatible.

And when I was in a different phase of my life, it felt a lot like someone who wanted all the social and practical privileges of marriage while offsetting the downsides of their bad marriage with someone like me. They just didn't want to give up the assets or have to have their kids on their own half the time or whatever. It wasn't suited to someone who wanted a life partner, basically. Nowadays that kind of low commitment and entanglement dating suits me better.