BearNFirelight
Posts: 18
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
My personal feeling is that the primary relationship is defined by the initial relationship in place. I don't know that 'secondary' is a good term for the third or fourth brought into the 'primary' relationship, but you can't discout that the third (for the sake of this conversation) is entering an established relationship. Therefore bears the responsibility of integrating into it successfully. It is of course a common responsibility of all to make the dynamic work, but there wouldn't be much loyalty in the primary relationship if the overall loyalty, should a choice have to be made, wasn't placed in the established relationship versus a new developing one. (This also of course presumes there are not problems in the already established relationship.)
Anyone who has been around poly relationships will know that primary relationships don't just define "established" or "married" relationships. They define the truly established and stable relationship in the dynamic. It could start with two in a not so stable dynamic and the third actually wind up over time become the primary relationship with one of the first two. It could be three who come together in a short period of time and form the core/primary relationship of three, not two. In Poly you can't put defined labels on such things. One such relationship could have many come and go from the primary dynamic over the years, but it remains fast despite who may come and go. Now if you are lucky enough to find one or more who come into the primary relationship and integrate well....thus becoming part of the core relationship, then I hardly think looking at them as a secondary relationship is fair or right. They have earned the right to now be part of the primary relationship. It would then only be others new to the relationship, where a question of loyalty or longivity still remains that could be considered secondary relationships.
If a third enters the primary relationship and make a long term committment to it, no matter if they serve one, both, Top one or both, they are part of the core relationship and giving them less than the respect and mutual devotion that the primary relationship gets is a receipe for disaster. That plants the seeds of separation and alienation that will ultimately lead to a decision having to be made between the triad (again, used for this example). In short, your setting yourself up to fail. I can only see this definition used long term in a dynamic where it is always understood the 'secondary' may one day leave.
If a secondary seeks to be a core part of the dynamic and a 'member' of the family and constructively works to that end, is accepted as such and cared for mutually by the primary partners in the relationship, then I think they've earned the right to become of equal value and importance in the core or primary relationship. Why would anyone commit to a long term relationship, if the security of being in one without fear of being tossed aside as less than the core relationship was not something that could be earned? It shouldn't matter if they have only been in the relationship for a year versus the years invested in the previously primarly relationship. All parties have agreed to expand the relationship to include another and should not put conditions on that once a point of stability and long term commitment have been made. Were such conditions placed on either of the initial two in the dynamic? Nope...they committed and make a go of it from day one of the true relationship being formed. There is simply too much investment of time, energy, emotion and trust to leave it as something always hanging delicately in the wind. All must be able to trust that this is how its going to be and so long as all work to keep it so, no life altering events will occur, nor will any be left feeling like less than part of the whole.
If you practice your poly under the terms of simple play partners, or distanced relationships, then there is no real and serious commitment to a long term relationship. No 24/7 dynamic and lives being built together.....under these conditions there is most definately a Primary and secondary relationship status, providing there is even an true primary relationship that falls under that 24/7 committed status.
Just one Dom's opinion.
|
Primary partner? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread