Part 1: Bad (Controlling) Hierarchical Polyamory
I really like words. I also think they’re extremely important. Their definitions are important. A lot of disagreements stem from people disagreeing on the definition of a word or saying something in the wrong context. You have no idea how many fights my husband and I have gotten into because we had different ideas about the definition of a word. Therefore, I think it’s worth discussing the language we use to describe relationships. Now I’m not saying to label everyone, I think labels are less important, but terms and language are important. If you have the right terms to describe concepts, you can mash them up just right (like the music genres) to explain a concept to someone without defining a permanent label. That being said, let’s discuss another word that’s just about as heated as “Ultimatum” from my last post:
hierarchy: noun, any system of persons or things ranked one above another
This gets a lot of people’s goats. By definition, hierarchy in a relationship means one person is more important than another. That can definitely be bad, but let’s break it down and see if there’s ever a place where it might be good. So, what is Bad Hierarchical Polyamory?
It’s true by definition when you practice hierarchy in your polyamorous relationships, you’re putting some people above others, giving some kind of preference to one or more people in your polycule. The negative connotation has very relevant roots. Polyamory has been around for a long time, but in the United States is only recently gaining momentum. A number of people who currently identify as polyamorous didn’t even know it was an option until much later in their lives. It led them to get into monogamous relationships prior to fully understanding polyamory, or even polyamorous relationships with a poor understanding of polyamory or their ability to operate in that type of relationship structure.
Often, one partner feels threatened. They may worry that their poly partner will leave them for another love, or just that they won’t get as much of their partner’s attention as they want. They may say things like:
“I don’t mind that you’re dating other people, but I have to come first. If I feel like that relationship is damaging ours, I have the right to change it or end it.”
This can come from a place of self-preservation: “I need to make sure I don’t get hurt.” It could come from resentment and anger: “That new partner is messing up my life and is my enemy, I need to keep them in their place.”
Regardless of where it comes from, the new partner’s feelings aren’t being considered. Often the current partner asks for “veto power” which basically allows them to change or end relationship at their whim because they feel it is harmful to the “primary” relationship. This puts the “secondary” partner in an awkward and painful position. You can date this person, but they might be forced to break up with you at any time for no reason or explanation. This is really stressful and frankly, mean.
“Well, it’s not like I’m going to use that power, I just need to know that I have it.”
There are few things I’ll take a hard stance against, but veto power is one of them. Polyamory, relationships in general, are about communication. Giving one person the power to control another is never appropriate. If you don’t plan on using it, then why do you need it?
“I cheated on him before so I gave him veto power so he would trust me.”
No. I mean if you’re in a monogamous relationship and you want to give someone the power to control your life, sure whatever...that’s your problem. In a polyamorous relationship, you’re NOT the only one being impacted. Everyone else you’re dating is as well. It isn’t up to YOU to give away someone else’s control or to request that a partner give away their other partner’s control.
This type of hierarchy, one that’s born from anger or jealousy or fear, is unbalanced. To points in prior posts, everyone makes their own choices so the “secondary” partner can always opt out if the structure of the polycule isn’t conducive to their happiness. I specifically call this out though to the people who are trying to practice it, the primary couples who are trying to cram monogamy into a polyamorous box. If you’re going to put that kind of restrictions on a relationship, you might be practicing a form of non-monogamy but you’re not practicing polyamory. Remember, polyamory means “many loves.” If you really intend to find new partners you love...would you put them in a position where someone else could choose to hurt them so badly? If you love them do you want to put yourself in a position where YOU could be hurt so badly?
You don’t give someone power over another, all you’re doing is trading one partner’s possible hurt for another’s. Instead of veto power or “controlling hierarchy” (actually, I kind of like that phrase - it’s going in the title), why don’t we communicate?
Veto power just hides the problem, communication attempts to find the root cause. Instead of saying “You’re no longer allowed to see him”, say “It hurts me when you see him because...” and think of why it hurts.
“It hurts me because I feel unloved when you’re with someone else”
If it’s just that you don’t want your partner with someone else...well you did choose to stay with your partner who is polyamorous. It’s not fair to turn the tables and hurt someone else. Your partner IS polyamorous and you need to work on either accepting that or deciding that it is unacceptable, but you can’t just end their relationship. a) it hurts someone else and b) someone new will eventually come along. The root cause needs to be addressed.
What if it’s something more serious?
“When you see him, you forget about promises you made. You promised to come to our daughter’s soccer game, but you missed it because you slept in with your boyfriend and it hurt her feelings.”
or...
“When you go out with him you’re spending so much money. Things are already tight and we can barely pay our mortgage as it is.”
There are absolutely valid reasons for one partner to take issue with another relationship, but calling in veto power doesn’t solve anything but discussing the problem might.
A final note to consider...even if a partner gives another partner veto power, we make our own choices. Veto power isn’t real control, it’s the illusion of control. In the end, the veto is a request that may or may not be honored. Each partner makes a choice each time and it’s possible that one day that veto power will be enacted on a love they’re unwilling to leave and no amount of veto power will save the primary relationship.
