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.
I was in Roy's polyamory group for a while - I find he tends to bring a stronger idealism angle to the poly framings. I enjoy Libby Sinback's ('That Polyam Mom') more relativist, non-judgmental approach to different poly styles and her comment that prioritisation is not the same as hierarchy. It is natural to prioritise different relationships at different times and because of different circumstances. To me, problematic hierarchy is when there is a 'no negotiation possible' type of approach where the terms are set and that's that.
I thought your Christmas example was interesting and relevant to my own situation this past Christmas, where it really was hard for my partner of one year to not be able to have the occasion with me because that's a tradition I have with my partner of 7 years and he had no one else to spend it with (whereas my newer partner did have other options). The potential impact just didn't feel worth a renegotiation. Even though I am not hierarchical in my poly approach, it does feel sometimes that a longer shared history creates more of this kind of thing, and it's hard to know how to handle it.
I'm mono, but in a long-distance relationship with a poly man who is about to move to me (and my 6! kids). I would definitely describe the last 18 months as...character building. I'm currently his only "serious" partner (for lack of a better term), though I have some lovely metas who are long-term FWBs and there are a few comets whom I have not yet met. My metas and I are in the process of becoming actual friends— meeting the second one in real life in a few weeks! Eep!
I spend a lot of time thinking about this kind of stuff— hierarchy, traditions, holidays, security— all of it! I'm so thankful for you and others sharing your personal experiences!
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.
Hierarchy is about power not priority is a helpful reframe, thank you Miko
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.
I was in Roy's polyamory group for a while - I find he tends to bring a stronger idealism angle to the poly framings. I enjoy Libby Sinback's ('That Polyam Mom') more relativist, non-judgmental approach to different poly styles and her comment that prioritisation is not the same as hierarchy. It is natural to prioritise different relationships at different times and because of different circumstances. To me, problematic hierarchy is when there is a 'no negotiation possible' type of approach where the terms are set and that's that.
I thought your Christmas example was interesting and relevant to my own situation this past Christmas, where it really was hard for my partner of one year to not be able to have the occasion with me because that's a tradition I have with my partner of 7 years and he had no one else to spend it with (whereas my newer partner did have other options). The potential impact just didn't feel worth a renegotiation. Even though I am not hierarchical in my poly approach, it does feel sometimes that a longer shared history creates more of this kind of thing, and it's hard to know how to handle it.
I'm mono, but in a long-distance relationship with a poly man who is about to move to me (and my 6! kids). I would definitely describe the last 18 months as...character building. I'm currently his only "serious" partner (for lack of a better term), though I have some lovely metas who are long-term FWBs and there are a few comets whom I have not yet met. My metas and I are in the process of becoming actual friends— meeting the second one in real life in a few weeks! Eep!
I spend a lot of time thinking about this kind of stuff— hierarchy, traditions, holidays, security— all of it! I'm so thankful for you and others sharing your personal experiences!