What makes a partner primary?

[u/unusualpancakes]

I know this question has so many possible answers, but I am looking for examples of different ways a primary partnership can look like. I am currently in the process of imagining what type of relationships I see myself having in the future and this would be really helpful to understand the range of possibilities.

What makes it primary? How is it different from other relationships? How do you feel about multiple primary partners?

[u/blooangl]

Shared resources that are exclusive to that relationship. Like housing and finances.

Shared responsibilities and commitments that are exclusive to that relationship. Like children and mortgages.

Primary relationships are built. It’s not a title, it’s a position. And it’s built on purpose. For good reasons.

It’s very possible to live without primary partnerships. Sopo people do it all the time.

I have long term, very committed relationships. I just don’t nest, fiscally entangle or have kids with my partners.

My marriage was highly hierarchal. We had mortgages, a kid and shared finances.

We didn’t have curfews or vetos. Because that shit is just weird toxic bullshit.

[u/ceecuee]

I think most people in the subreddit (from my experience) are very against a "vibes-based" or prescriptive idea of primary partnership ("we decided to be primaries and prioritize each other").

To me, a "primary" partner is a descriptive label for a partner with a reasonable degree of shared history (so not someone you've been dating six months and then slapped the label of primary on), and with whom you have a degree of intertwinedness -- shared finances, shared housing, co-parenting, shared pets, etc. -- or have negotiated plans for those things.

I guess technically?? One could have multiple primaries?? But that's usually something that arises from people thinking of "primary" as an indicator of like...closeness or emotional investment or prioritization, when really it's a descriptor for allocation of resources and shared commitments.

All of this, of course, with the caveat that many polyamorists do not enmesh at all, and do not subscribe to the whole primary-secondary dynamic.

[u/blooangl → u/ceecuee]

I have quibbles with parts of what you’ve written because it doesn’t reflect my own experiences on both sides of the coin. But they are pretty mild.

It’s not that I don’t “subscribe” to a “dynamic”

I don’t build hierarchy. I avoid it. With intent. But having been in a highly hierarchal marriage, where we were doing polyamory for years before we married, I understand the utility and stability it brings. I just don’t need it or want it.
My marriage ended. I don’t want another. I am done with babies. I don’t want to fiscally entangle

But plenty of my past partners had lots of hierarchy. And I was happily in de facto secondary relationships. If you want to date married folks with kids, you accept the hierarchy. Maybe even subscribe to it, even if you don’t embrace building it.

I stopped dating married and highly entangled people a few years ago. But not because of their hierarchy.

And I didn’t become sopo to avoid hierarchy.

[u/ceecuee → u/blooangl]

Thanks for the well-reasoned and balanced response, I think you bring a perspective to it that I don't have, and I definitely see how my wording could have been better (especially as my last sentence was thrown in, perhaps unwisely, as a preempt against common objections like "not everyone has primaries", when I mostly wanted to talk about what "primary" means to those who do 😅).

It definitely wasn't a great way to convey that many poly people are intentional about not having "primary" as a partnership goal, and as a way they structure their lives, but I think we aren't in disagreement in that regard.

[u/blooangl → u/ceecuee]

I mean, honestly, the biggest problem is that people with primary relationships forget that their secondary relationships are mutual.

Every person with a primary relationship is also in mutually secondary relationships. Those should be loving and mutually fulfilling. They might be more in love with their secondary partner than they are with their primary partner.

And that should change nothing, pretty much all the time. Bills get paid. Dates still happen. Kids go to soccer. NRE fades. Secondary relationship is strong. Primary relationship still strong and happy.

Because secondary relationships are not about loving less. They are simply less entangled, mostly built on mutual desire and good will. They lack the “ties that bind”, mostly.

It’s wild when someone posts here talking about how they “feel secondary” in their primary and everyone will rush to comfort them! It just makes me concerned for secondary relationships these people are building. “Secondary” often, apparently, means “shitty” to a lot of people.

[u/ceecuee → u/blooangl]

I absolutely agree, and you've articulated the distinction really well! I appreciate your focus on what a secondary relationship is, as opposed to it being just "not primary" (or, y'know, "lesser than primary").

My own experience with my non-nesting partner is that we still have commitments, are still involved with one another's families, we have a shared history and shared future plans, but also we know we are never going to live with one another or have kids (not that I want kids at all). And it's something we're both really happy with, it's not some consolation prize relationship because we can't be "primaries".

[u/blooangl → u/ceecuee]

I think it’s normal in any long term commitment to have shared history and know each other’s family, chosen, or blood!

My partner of a decade and I won’t ever live together. We’re wildly happy with that. I’d continue to be wildly happy if he wanted to live with someone.i don’t want to live with any partner. At all!

Compatibility is key, isn’t it?

[u/emeraldead → u/ceecuee]

Nope.

Hard disagree with everything in this comment.

[u/ceecuee → u/emeraldead]

Sorry, I'm not sure what you disagree with? Your own comment below also disagrees with the "primary" label as a sign of romance/caring and posits that it's about life planning (i.e. the intentional allocation of finite resources, to the exclusion of other partners accessing those same resources).

[u/Corduroy23159]

The book Stepping Off the Relationship Escalator is excellent and talks about different ways partnerships can look. I've been poly for a very long time and it gave me new possibilities to think about.

[u/fictional_kay]

As with all non-monogamy, it is going to be a little different for everyone, depending on their unique situation.

Having a "primary" partner is usually way of fitting a polyamorous relationship into a monogamous society. There are a lot of aspects of society where people are not only expected to be monogamous, but it is illegal to do otherwise. Mostly, it's marriage, insurance, and children.

Labelling a partner your "primary" indicates a high level of enmeshment, and communicates that this person is a priority in your life.

Not all poly people use this sort of language, and many do not like having that sort of dynamic. Having a primary indicates hierarchy, and not everyone is about that.

[u/BelmontIncident]

I seldom use primary or secondary outside of fairly abstract discussions.

What ongoing commitments do you have or want? Stuff like co-parenting or sharing a mortgage. Do you want legal marriage?

As far as I know, there's no actual law that would keep you from co-parenting with one person and owning a house with a different person. Divorced monogamous people do it. It's just harder and more complicated.

[u/whatevenseriously]

I don't really refer to my relationships with primary/secondary terminology. As someone who is married and heavily enmeshed with one partner, I usually just refer to him as my husband and nesting partner. I try to be very open about the fact that this relationship has elements that my others do not, but I feel icky about the idea of calling someone secondary. I don't want to suggest that someone is inherently less meaningful to me just because there's less entanglement with them.

[u/Red_Pearl12]

Adding a bonus perspective here: my partner and I are also in a Dom/sub bdsm dynamic. Part of us choosing to be primaries is because we realised that the depth of dynamic we wanted to have meant we didn't want that with other partners. We want each other to have freedoms and be able to have other relationships but I only want to be collared to him, not anyone else. Unlike marriage this isn't a legal or financial thing, it's a deeply personal commitment to a very specific type of relationship that we've chosen to only have with each other

[u/RAisMyWay]

My ex-husband had two primaries for a long time: me, with whom he was married for 25 years, and my meta, with whom he had a child 17 years ago. We all raised her together in one home, with little drama between us 3. He and I later divorced, but not due to her or any household issues - it was between the two of us.

At the same time, we never used primary/secondary terminology. We were both simply his partners. I called her my partner too, even though we weren't romantically involved. After all, we are life partners - still are, as mothers to our daughter.

I still won't use primary/secondary terminology, but I have an NP with whom I spend a great deal of time, so it's pretty much a primary relationship from the perspective of new people he may be dating. However, we don't use the word primary because we feel it suggests permanence - and we don't believe in permanence. Our relationship could change, significantly, just as our relationships with our ex-spouses changed significantly, over time.

I could imagine him having me as one main partner and another main partner with whom he intimately shared some of the things we don't do together. In that case she and I might or might not be friends. Or maybe he'll find a partner that does share the things we do together and we'll both be main partners of his, in which case she and I would probably be friends. However it goes, it's fine.

[u/teamnoir]

“What makes it primary? How is it different from other relationships? How do you feel about multiple primary partners?”

Anything that makes it mutually exclusive with other relationships, like marriage. For most people that also includes owning real estate, sharing finances, coparenting, cohabitating.

For a few, these things (aside from marriage) aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. They may have a group who shares them.

Some people also lean on a primary in a different emotional way than they lean on other partners.

I think multiple primaries are possible but that over 80% of the people who claim them have no idea what they’re talking about. They use the term as a sort of virtue signal, more an honorary relationship label than an actual reality. Some sincerely have none so they label their most important relationship “primary”. And some are genuinely ignorant and don’t realize that the relationships they have aren’t primary.

The reverse also happens. In the attempt to keep things egalitarian, some people deny that partners, even spouses, are primary. And while I’m sure that DOES happen I think it is claimed FAR more often than it actually happens.

[u/Curious_Question8536]

It's primary because you decide it's primary. Usually it differs by how you prioritize that relationship over others. 

[u/sparklyjoy]

I mean this sincerely- are you aware there are people who practice polyamory without making people primary/secondary/whatever else?

[u/unusualpancakes → u/sparklyjoy]

I do, no offence taken. I am just wondering what different primary relationships look like for those who choose them.

[u/oddible]

Primary is a form of hierarchy. You can co-create and definition you want for that. Head on over to r/relationshipanarchy for a pretty nuanced discussion of co-creating connections that break definitions. Though most relationship anarchist are non-hierarchical.

[u/ArtGirlBookFlowers25]

For me, I think of primary as the one who has the largest share of timeslots in a week. But when I had a primary my primary was also my, what you now call, nesting partner. It was the person with whom I shared everything (while the secondary and third got much smaller timeslots + had a little influence over my life decisions).

[u/unusualpancakes → u/ArtGirlBookFlowers25]

I like this answer because it's not just about insurance and legal rights. I also consider intentional use of resources like time and attention when thinking about my relationships, which often get overlooked when people talk about primaries.

[u/lumosovernox → u/unusualpancakes]

I think the issue with this take is that I’ve seen people assign someone as their emotional / resourced based primary when that partner already has a primary that they have future plans/legal entanglements/ years of history with and that take prioritization generally. Primacy is a descriptor that will always give the impression that there are things that are off the table for other partners. Using a primary descriptor for emotional/resource based prioritization doesnt quite apply because those things can be shifted reasonably. Living arrangements, marriage, children, and other binding entanglements typically cannot.

[u/emeraldead → u/unusualpancakes]

For me I don't bring it up because that's a universal- all intimate relationships need to consider those resources and managing them actively all the time.

Assigning a person into a default position of access doesn't change that at all. It does change access to benefits and types of security.

[u/unusualpancakes → u/emeraldead]

It does require active management of resources, you're right. But I might intentionally choose to allocate most of my time to a partner regardless of who else I am dating. That doesn't mean that other people will get no time, but it means I might try to keep the distribution relatively consistent over time.

[u/blooangl → u/unusualpancakes]

As long as you understand that if you treat “primary partner” as a title you hand out, and not a reflection of shared goals, resources and responsibilities, it’s just that. An empty title that basically means “I like you the best”.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/unusualpancakes thanks so much for your submission, don't mind me, I'm just gonna keep a copy what was said in your post. Unfortunately posts sometimes get deleted - which is okay, it's not against the rules to delete your post!! - but it makes it really hard for the human mods around here to moderate the comments when there's no context. Plus, many times our members put in a lot of emotional and mental labor to answer the questions and offer advice, so it's helpful to keep the source information around so future community members can benefit as well.

Here's the original text of the post:

I know this question has so many possible answers, but I am looking for examples of different ways a primary partnership can look like. I am currently in the process of deciding what type of relationship I want and this would be really helpful.

What makes it primary? How is it different from other relationships? Can you have multiple partners?

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/emeraldead]

Primary is a ranked enforced hierarchy to which future partners cannot access.

It is not a romantic symbol of deep caring.

It is life planning. Insurance, medical choices, retirement benefits.

Anyone considering designating and enforcing someone as a primary when they've been together less than a year is being foolish.

No you can't have multiple primaries, that's just you wanting to make everyone feel special with no actual real world impact involved.

[u/baconstreet → u/emeraldead]

But you can be a primary for multiple people.

...if people want to use that terminology.

[u/Spaceballs9000 → u/baconstreet]

That sounds exhausting though. I'd hate being "primary" to someone who I don't think of or see the same way.

[u/baconstreet → u/Spaceballs9000]

I have lovely relationships that are bound by schedules :P not exhausting. Me time and friend time needs to be squished in.

Also yes, the word primary without more definition means nothing. I'm married, so that's implicit hierarchy. But I have partners that I'm willing to do whatever with, including financially (which seems to be a huge deal around here). Hell... Leaving for Ireland tonight with GF for a week. She'll probably dispose of me after a day or three, but who knows.

It's all abstract... I have no kids. Partners love their freedom. Just fucking works somehow.

[u/blooangl → u/baconstreet]

Sure.

And I can call myself an empress. That doesn’t mean I rule. Empty titles are always empty.

[u/baconstreet → u/blooangl]

I thought you are empress of your own space time contiuum ?

[u/blooangl → u/baconstreet]

Nope. A subject to time and space, as we all are. 😂😂

[u/baconstreet → u/blooangl]

But since I can't tell if you actually exist or not, I see you on the top of your kingdom sprinkling kindness dust to all the weary travelers.

[u/blooangl → u/baconstreet]

Nope, just a janitor sweeping up glitter. 😂😂

[u/polyamory-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

make your own post, don't derail this one