Who should be the primary?

D

drewprosch88

New member
Hi all,

I'm kind of new to open, but I started dating someone married about a year ago. During that time, I had a few flings but nothing really came from any of them. About a few months ago, I started dating someone more seriously.

Going back a little bit here... I see my married man (mm-just what I've called him for awhile) once a week or maybe once every other week, but see my other boyfriend more frequently. This is where I'm starting to get confused and feeling guilty about things. I can see myself with the new boyfriend in a long-term relationship (possibly as a partner) and I know I'm feeling the NRE right now. I know the first and foremost thing to do is have a conversation with both guys about who the primary is/will be, but I'm curious if any of you have had an experience similar to this where you come into open seeing someone less available then start dating another person who you see far more often.
 
You don't need to designate anyone primary at all. Hierarchy is not a requirement in polyamory (and, in my opinion, should have no place in love relationships). Can't you simply enjoy what you have with each of them without making one more important than the other or applying some label to it?
 
nycindie said:
You don't need to designate anyone primary at all. Hierarchy is not a requirement in polyamory (and, in my opinion, should have no place in love relationships). Can't you simply enjoy what you have with each of them without making one more important than the other or applying some label to it?
Click to expand...


I agree with the above. Neither has to be primary. If you choose that sort of hiergherchical structure for your relationships then that's a discussion to have with your partners.

It also depends on what the word Primary means to you and to your partners.
 
I agree that having a "primary" isn't required really at all. I think that might just make things more complicated in the long run.
 
Same here.

Personally, I have an issue with hierarchical language in general, because to me it implies that one person is *more* important than the other, and I believe everyone in my life is equally important, just in different ways. I'm Boots's FWB; Glow is his girlfriend of over a year. Of course she's going to have more of his time and attention, and she has his heart. But that doesn't mean I'm less important than she is. Only that she's important in a very different way from me. She has a different place in his life than I do. Different. Not more or less. (That's what Boots has said as well; even after we agreed we're FWBs, he seemed surprised and actually argued with me when I said Glow should take priority over me.)

In your situation, I wouldn't say there is a primary or secondary. There's one you spend more time with than the other. That's it.
 
A lot of people are calling it "entangled and non entangled ". For when you live with one partner and not the other. You basically have two boyfriends, one who you see more often than the other.
 
Both my boys are my primaries, although I currently live more with one than the other. I mingle economies with both of them. And the guy I live with the least and I have a cat together. There is no need to have hierarchies unless you want to.
 
Thanks for all the replies and all of you make a really good point. I just remember something married man mentioned when I started dating my other boyfriend so I wasn't sure if it was something to really consider to label or not. But it looks like it would be silly to do so.
 
Not silly. Some people need labels and hierarchy, and that's okay if that's what works for everyone involved.

It might not be *necessary*, though, especially if the only reason for doing it is "This is how poly works" or "Well, you have to choose."
 
Yeah, there's no "Rule" that says someone has to be "The Primary" ... or even that there can only be one primary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top