Should we avoid hierarchy in our relationships?
Even “descriptive” ones
Up until the community hour last week, I would have somewhat proudly called the relationship between Flo and me descriptively hierarchal but not prescriptively hierarchical.
Descriptive hierarchy is hierarchy by circumstance, meaning because you have a shared home, shared kids, shared assets, you’ve been together for X number of years, or whatever it is, you prioritize that relationship over others.
I would not have described our relationship as prescriptively hierarchical, however, meaning hierarchical by definition. In this case, our relationship would be THE priority because we have prescribed or defined it as such: the most important relationship, one that will take precedence over all others. (Just because that’s what we say and we’re the rulers, so just deal with it!)
Which sounds a bit like the meaner, almost despotic version of relationship hierarchy.
But after last week, I’m not so sure there’s much of a difference between the two.
(Special surprise!) attendee Roy Graff (@openrelating)’s, who is solo polyamorous and not in hierarchy (at least as best as he can be), comments made me realize it doesn’t matter if we’re in descriptive or prescriptive hierarchy. Because from the perspective of anyone else we might be involved with, hierarchy is hierarchy.
It doesn’t matter which kind it is.
Hierarchy is hierarchy
For example, if Flo, Avi, and I are always going to go to Christmas with Flo’s family in Cologne, and if that’s not really negotiable, we can argue it’s because we are a family and have been together for many years and that’s just always the way it’s been.
But really we are practicing hierarchy and someone else may eventually miss the fact they can never be in the position of being able to celebrate Christmas together with Flo or with all of us.
For the record, I don’t see this as non-negotiable, but there will be other non-negotiables, especially given we have a child together.
For example, child care is always going to be more important than pretty much everything else. When it comes to another partner coming in and wanting more time with Flo or me, we know we’ll have to think of Avi first. Maybe we can prioritize child care and make more time for a new partner at the same time (we probably can!) but the priority still exists.
Because of our enmeshment, there’s some sort of order, explicit or not.
I’m low-key relieved that Flo and my lives are so enmeshed that it’s almost impossible not to be at least a bit hierarchical.
If we’re hierarchical, we’re hierarchal. Period. We should just own up to it and be clear about the ways we are so, so that as we go into potential relationships with other people, everyone is in the know.
But being #1 makes me feel safe
Last week’s conversation also made me realize that although I don’t believe hierarchy is a good thing (ranking people is ick), I’m honestly low-key relieved that Flo and my lives are so enmeshed that it’s almost impossible not to be at least a bit hierarchical. I feel secure knowing that we have a child together and thus our happiness and needs are going to be of the utmost importance in part because of that fact. (If we’re not happy and supported and loved, it’s going to be much harder to support and love our baby the best we can.)
At the same time, big-picture, I don’t want hierarchy to be the reason I feel safe. I want to feel safe because I’m secure in myself. Because I know I’m fundamentally valuable and lovable no matter who specifically loves me.
Also I want it to be enough that my partner loves and cares for me and takes my needs into consideration. Why does him doing that somehow “more” than he does it for someone else matter, as long as my needs are being met and my boundaries are respected? The “ranking” shouldn’t actually make a difference.
The enmeshment of our resources and the inherent hierarchy that arises from it should not be the reason I feel safe.
And all of this relates back to something that I’m constantly reminded of throughout this journey — sometimes we’re not exactly in the place we’d like to be. I’m hierarchal even though I imagine a more perfect world where I’m not and don’t feel any need to be. The same goes for my occasional jealousy. I feel it even though an ideal me wouldn’t feel it.
And that’s totally okay.
Like 95% of people out there, I grew up in a monogamous world and inherited a monogamous mindset, influenced by couple’s privilege, hierarchy, ownership and capitalism. I can’t just snap! Make it go away.
But I can still try.
What else?
A spicy personal essay
The special paywalled post at the beginning of Feb will be a spicy one, so stick with me for that!
She could only go wild with someone else
In case you missed it, in last weekend’s advice column, one asker wonders if being anxiously attached should stop them from exploring non-monogamy. Another’s partner has been able to let go sexually with someone else in a way she hasn’t with him. It’s a beautiful and it hurts all at once. Check it out.
Me 2 years ago in Guanajuato, Mexico on a solo trip - my last hurrah before getting pregos. I love this country!
I don’t remember who, but someone said hierarchies are about power, not priority. We can never prioritise absolutely every person in our lives the same, and I can’t see any reason why that would be desirable either. We will always have some people we are closer to and some people who for different reasons are more bound to our daily life or we spend more time with or have other types of connections with. However, when it comes to hierarchy, there are power structures of who get a say in how things are done, which things are prioritised in which ways, which people are invited or not invited, not based on individual connections, but BECAUSE of the hierarchy itself. That one relationship has power to decide over how the other relationships work instead of every relationship being its own thing negotiated from individual needs, desires and limits. Even if it’s difficult in this society, to share economy, children, housing or priorities doesn’t have to mean hierarchy (even if they often do). It just means that there are things within those relationships that are shared which aren’t shared in other relationships.
Just like with friends. I love all my friends and none of them have any power over how I spend my time with other friends. Some friends I spend less time with but share interests I don’t share with others for compatibility reasons. I will prioritise some friends over others at some points in my (everyday) life, not because some friends are more important or have ultimate priority, but because we better match in how we live our lives, what our needs and desires and boundaries are at the time.
I've taken to using the term "logistical hierarchy", meaning that we are entwined in the day to day but that things are open for negotiation.
To use your Christmas in Cologne example... Inviting partners and their families to our Christmas (and other) dinners, joining them when they have family gatherings (not as a couple but as partners) and having an open door, come visit, we love having you here, policy.