Adding to a closed group

[Starting late 116]

Hi All - It's been a while since we posted, mostly because we've been super happy! We've found a like minded couple, and get together with them once a month or so. We wanted to find someone we could be exclusive with, and enjoy all of the benefits that "cum" with that. ;)

 

But, as with all good things, something's come up. The other couple has recently met a single woman who has expressed interest in being in our group. She's very pretty and open to the same things we enjoy, the problem is that she's much younger, and therefore, more sexually active with other partners. Whereas the other couple in our group has been exclusive between themselves and us, this opens up potential issues with playing bareback.

 

Of course the two guys in the group are over the moon excited, I guess single women are called unicorns, bc they don't really exist? Funny. And yes, I and the other wife also find her attractive and we like the idea of playing with someone younger. But it does ruin the dynamic we currently have, which I in particular, really love (the cum play part of it is what drew me to taking the plunge in the lifestyle)

 

Just not sure what to do - add to what we have, while also adding condoms, or try to keep what we have, and miss out (and disappoint the others)

 

Advice?

[Numex 2,323]

We are also in a closed group of married couples and were approached by a single woman who wanted to join us but didn't want to keep her sexual activity exclusively in the group. Being single, she still wanted to date and fuck a guy if she found the potential for an on-going relationship. It took very little discussion for all of us to say No. 

[AdamGunn2 316]

Well, there's a lot of things to think about here, and Numex is an expert in this.

 

But, I'd assume the dynamic is pretty clear here - EVERYONE, including the wives, must be unanimous in a decision to let the single woman in, and in the 'rules' of her joining. If there's even one person with any reservations, that person should be able to veto the opportunity.

[couplers 4,409]

8 hours ago, AdamGunn2 said:

EVERYONE, including the wives, must be unanimous in a decision to let the single woman in,

Of course keeping in mind also that women can satisfy a surplus of men better than men satisfy extra women.  Some woman or women will be dealing with trying to revive a limp dick.

 

It's often written here how a woman is screwing one guy while simultaneously getting another off orally.  How often do we read about a guy doing double duty with his dick in one pussy, licking another, while successfully getting both to orgasm at the same time? 

Edited July 23 by couplers

[cplnluv1 850]

Our group is not entirely closed, we just find a mutual enjoyment in meeting for our fun. We went years looking for new partners which became exhausting and disappointing many times. We don’t have a rule about outside play, all couples are open to have fun away from our group. 
I understand the reason for a closed group, safety and less chance of disease or infection being primary. Recently we allowed a divorced younger woman who has a lifestyle history to join our party. 

[Starting late 116]

51 minutes ago, cplnluv1 said:

Recently we allowed a divorced younger woman who has a lifestyle history to join our party. 

And how did it go? Were you playing bareback before her?

[Starting late 116]

1 hour ago, couplers said:

Of course keeping in mind also that women can satisfy a surplus of men better than men satisfy extra women.  Some woman or women will be dealing with trying to revive a limp dick.

 

It's often written here how a woman is screwing one guy while simultaneously getting another off orally.  How often do we read about a guy doing double duty with his dick in one pussy, licking another, while successfully getting both to orgasm at the same time? 

Such a good point. I think there's an allure, almost a mysticism to a single female that makes it more exciting. The reality is of course very different.

[Starting late 116]

10 hours ago, AdamGunn2 said:

EVERYONE, including the wives, must be unanimous in a decision to let the single woman in, and in the 'rules' of her joining. If there's even one person with any reservations, that person should be able to veto the opportunity.

For sure, and even though ATM I'm the lone holdout, no one is pressuring me about it, and we're all happy to go on as we were, at least i'm pretty certain of that.

 

I've met the woman for drinks, nothing remotely sexual, not even the conversation and she's enjoyable to be around (a definite requirement for me). She also sent us PG/R rated photos, and, uh, wow! So there's that. I'm just completely on the fence. Love what we have now, but she could add a fun, sexy dimension.

[hunterdonNJcpl 1,307]

We enjoy the dynamic that singles, whether male or female, bring to couples-only parties.  We feel like 3 is never a crowd!

[cplnluv1 850]

1 hour ago, Starting late said:

And how did it go? Were you playing bareback before her?

She is a doll, Alan and I adore her. We met when she was married and now she is almost like family in a good way. She doesn’t mind our rule of being tested regularly. 

[couplers 4,409]

21 hours ago, hunterdonNJcpl said:

We feel like 3 is never a crowd!

 

On 7/22/2024 at 5:37 PM, Starting late said:

we've been super happy! We've found a like minded couple, and get together with them .. The other couple has recently met a single woman who has expressed interest in being in our group.

It wouldn't be 3, it would be 5.

[kellimc 222]

Many of the comments in this thread surprise me.

 

I have been rejected by groups, but only because of my age when I was not yet 21.  I have never been rejected by a group because I was single and might upset the dynamic. 

 

Having said that, I have encountered a number of hostile married women who thought I, as a single woman, was there to steal their man.  I had to explain many times that I'm in the lifestyle to avoid being in a relationship and still getting my considerable sexual needs met. Most of them became less hostile as they got to know me, but a few didn't. 

 

Of course, I'm in the lifestyle for a lot of other reasons, but that is one of the more important reasons. 

[hunterdonNJcpl 1,307]

4 hours ago, couplers said:

 

It wouldn't be 3, it would be 5.

we just find a little asymmetry is a nice addition to couples' parties 😁.

[Starting late 116]

8 hours ago, kellimc said:

Many of the comments in this thread surprise me.

 

I have been rejected by groups, but only because of my age when I was not yet 21.  I have never been rejected by a group because I was single and might upset the dynamic. 

 

Having said that, I have encountered a number of hostile married women who thought I, as a single woman, was there to steal their man.  I had to explain many times that I'm in the lifestyle to avoid being in a relationship and still getting my considerable sexual needs met. Most of them became less hostile as they got to know me, but a few didn't. 

 

Of course, I'm in the lifestyle for a lot of other reasons, but that is one of the more important reasons. 

Just to be clear, the only reason I'm hesitant is because we started playing exclusively with this other couple so that we could play bareback. I enjoy a man's cum on and in me (mostly on) but didn't feel safe doing that if we had partners where we weren't certain of their sexual activity.

 

This single woman is very nice, has an amazing body but very humble and giving, and in no way am I worried she's going to steal anything. She has been honest about her sexual activity, and I'm worried about adding her for that reason.

[couplers 4,409]

20 hours ago, kellimc said:

hostile married women who thought I, as a single woman, was there to steal their man.  I had to explain many times that I'm in the lifestyle to avoid being in a relationship and still getting my considerable sexual needs met.

I admire you more and more.  Knows what she wants, in control.

 

20 hours ago, kellimc said:

I have been rejected by groups, but only because of my age when I was not yet 21.

And at a young age.

 

I hope that my daughters grow up to have the early insight and maturity that you and PSU Lioness have.

 

[Fundamental Law 2,871]

It's fair to say that when a closed group admits another, it is (at least transiently) no longer closed. From a medical perspective, there is risk assessment and risk management that should be part of the decision making and planning. While there is little evidence that swingers are more likely carriers of a sexually transmitted infection than persons who report monogamy, STIs are known in both groups. There are five  general groups of STIs worth considering:

 

1. Common, very easily transmitted, easily detected, easily treated. Chlamydia and Trichomonas are examples in this group.  Transmission rates from a single sexual contact with those untreated and shedding the organisms are very high. 

 

2. Common, very easily transmitted, easily detected, must be identified early and treated aggressively to prevent serious health issues. Gonorrhea and Syphilis are examples in this group. Same story--a single contact with an infected person who is shedding pathogen is very high. 

 

3. Somewhat common, transmissibility moderate, often detected late, curable but costly to cure, no preventive immunization is available. Hepatitis C is in this group. 

 

4. Less common, less easily transmitted, often detected late, chronic and must be managed with suppressive treatment. Herpes and HIV fall into this group. The former is a nuisance, the latter requires care forever to suppress the viral load. (Side note, those with HIV who responsibly use their meds and suppress their viral load to undetectable are highly unlikely to transmit the illness to partners/playmates. ) 

 

5. Less common, transmissibility harder to assess, often detected late, chronic, for which preventive immunization is available. HPV and Hepatitis B fall into this group. 

 

All of the above is invites closed groups "adding" a single or a couple or whatever to stop, think, assess, and decide how they want to proceed. There are two major considerations.

 

1. Are all members of the (currently) closed group free of these pathogens?  Are the proposed new entrants similarly free of these pathogens? Those considerations suggest adding members should prompt _all_ members, current and proposed new ones, to simultaneously test. 

 

2. What is the probability that the group is actually remaining 'closed'?  The larger a group gets, the lower the probability that the group is actually remaining closed. 

 

It's worth taking 30 seconds to read this article in New Scientist: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn913-six-degrees-of-copulation  The salient quote from the brief piece: 

By checking how many sexual partners people had in one year, they could estimate the number of sexual liaisons needed to link two people. “We found it could be much less than six,” says Amaral. “Any two people might only be two or three connections apart,” he says. “Those people who think they are in no way connected to those with STDs are very wrong.”

 

(Disclosure: One of us was a peer-reviewer of the original publication in Nature, an archived form of which can be found here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0106507 )

[Fundamental Law 2,871]

Here is a "today" piece from the NYT on the syphilis situation in the US. It's not pretty. 

[Numex 2,323]

It's all about one's tolerance for risk and managing it. One of the aspects of our closed group is that we believe that there is much less likelihood of someone cheating, that is going outside the group, than with a regular vanilla married couple. Our group provides a quantity and variety of sex that reduces the temptation to cheat by needing to go outside the group. Any new potential members need to do 3 things: test and retest to our satisfaction; stay monogamous with their spouse until approved and joining the group; prior to joining, demonstrate the mindset of the group by being naked, having sex with your spouse in front of everyone, and watch others in the group having sex. Since the original group formed we've only had one other couple join. Surprisingly, they had no prior swinging experience and everyone was doubtful, but they passed, including the third test.

[Starting late 116]

For me, I feel very safe within our small group. It's only one couple, plus my husband and I. The four of us get tested regularly, and we play bareback, and I take full advantage of the fun that brings. I think if it weren't for the allure of a single female - a young, very attractive one at that - then this would be a non starter.

 

Since my original post, I had another meeting with her which was a little more flirtatious than the first, and I must say I'm quite taken with her. She's smart as a whip (why is that an expression?) very sweet, and giving. She's also forthright about her sexual past, and her plans going forward.  (I don't know if anyone remembers one of my earlier posts about the couple we met, but the wife of that couple has already exchanged panties with this woman) I've proposed to my husband and the other couple that she can join us on a limited basis, every other month, only after testing. Everyone seems agreeable to this, and while I haven't heard a final word, I have a feeling we'll move forward.

 

Thanks to everyone! I'm constantly amazed at my journey to this point. 3 years ago? I was a very different woman. I appreciate all of you.

[AdamGunn2 316]

2 hours ago, Starting late said:

She's smart as a whip (why is that an expression?)

Is has to do with jockey's knowing when to whip their horse to get the right speed boost at the right time -- you asked.

Edited July 30 by AdamGunn2

[bbarnsworth 2,597]

2 hours ago, AdamGunn2 said:

Is has to do with jockey's knowing when to whip their horse to get the right speed boost at the right time -- you asked.

I'll have to remember that the next time I'm using a whip on my lover 🤣