Are you a Swinger?

[VegasLee 1,486]

Over the years it seems that Swinging, wife swapping, recreational sex has evolved into being a “lifestyle” by the new definitions.

 

Many are encompassing many things in today’s current lifestyle so I thought it would be interesting to see what people think of the different types within the Lifestyle and what your thoughts are on it.

 

Swingers: Those that have recreational sex between consenting adults. They get naked and have sex with someone other than their spouse. (I guess this definition can change depending on how you define a sexual act. “I did not have sex with that woman.”)

 

Soft Swingers: People that get together, make out like they are in high school. Some include oral sex as soft swinging.

 

Voyeurs: This group goes to clubs and conventions where Swingers party so that they can watch others have sex. Many feel this helps their own relationships because it gets them all hot and bothered then they go home and have wild sex with their spouse.

 

Exhibitionists: Those that like to go to clubs and have sex in front of others but don’t swap or have any sexual contact with anyone besides their partner.

 

Flirts: (aka teasers) can be found at most any club. The women dances with other women, maybe showing her tits and attracting all the attention they can. Many of them keeping the interest of many of single men throughout the night with no intention of doing anything with them at the party or any other time.

 

I am sure there are many others that are now included within the “Lifestyle” that used to be Swinging.

 

All of us have our own views and ways we define the Lifestyle and our personal experiences within this Lifestyle. Does not make any of them right or wrong, just different and that is a good thing.

 

How do you define yourself within the Lifestyle?

How do you define the terms that are used in today’s Lifestyle?

Are there other “fetishes” that you believe are common within today’s Lifestyle?

[SCcpl40 74]

We're a full swap lifestyle couple.

[BiloxiCouple 695]

Recreational sex with others.

[two4youinswva 3,068]

We're Full-Swap, Venti, Half-Caf, Low-Fat, Soy Latte, Lite Foam swingers.

 

It does seem that we get lots of variety underneath the umbrella, doesn't it?

 

I agree with you Lee; there are a variety of views on what constitutes the Lifestyle, and I'm pretty open minded on what others decide defines it for them.

 

I don't know what fetishes would be considered common in the lifestyle. We've known some folks with foot fetishes, some into BDSM, as well as a few others, but I don't know if we've seen enough of these to call them common.

[LFM2 1,482]

Over the years, I have had many different couples contact me on Yahoo because they are looking for a bi female to join them. They always tell me that they are NOT swingers, they just enjoy having sex together with another woman.

 

Seems to me that they are engaging in "recreational sex between consenting adults" and by that definition they ARE swingers.

 

So are they swingers or not? And if not, what exactly are they? Hmmmm

 

Laura

 

Laura, totally sounds like swingers to me as well. They are only looking for females, and well, isn't that just semantics?

 

According to Lee's definitions, we're proud that we're swingers. We love that recreational sex between people! BTW... is there a difference between wife-swapping and swinging?

[good times 991]

We are a full swap couple, both straight. Anything else, while they may be swingers, aren't what we are looking for.

 

On the down side, it sometimes gets discouraging wading through all of these different types at the club. On the up side, by adding to the number of people coming to the club, they keep the admission price down.

[jandg 25]

Once again Lee brings up a good topic.

 

As for Gail and me, we go to the Vegas Red Rooster for the fun. We've met many new friends there, and enjoy the relaxed, casual atmosphere.

 

While we haven't had had full-swap, full-on intercourse with anyone else yet, we have had interactions with other couples, and the occasional single male. In those cases it just hasn't gone past the oral-sex stage.

 

I have Gail's permission to do whatever I want with another couple or female, but since she's not yet ready to have a full-on swap, I'm happy with the status quo.

 

The whole idea is to have fun, however it happens.

[cubnamy1995 124]

SWINGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

We're in it to have sex with lots of people. I agree with TNT. We are sluts. With that said, we are more "swinging hobbyists" than "lifestylers". We are full-swap (never quite got the soft-swap deal).

 

Swinging to us is a hobby. Nothing more. We don't consider it a lifestyle, because you would never know from our day-to-day life what we do behind closed doors. We don't feel compelled to be more than that. Swinging is what we do for fun, and it is personal to us. Nobody else needs to know.

 

We still consider ourselves swingers, but we wear many other hats as well.

[Chicup 41]

This is a minor pet-peev area of mine.

 

To me you are only a swinger if you are in a commited relationship and exchange/invite extra partners for sex.

 

I don't think intercourse is required but its gotta be more than heavy petting.

 

So singles are not swingers, none of the flirty couples are swingers, some guy bringing a call girl isn't a swinger, married but not to each other couples, are again, not swingers, nor do I feel open marriages make you a swinger.

 

Maybe my definition seems narrow but some make it so broad as to become meaningless. If you get off on your wife going to a bar alone, picking up some guy, and then telling you about it, thats fine, but its not something my wife or I could relate to nor would I call it swinging. If you are a single guy that for whatever reason persues couples looking for a MFM, thats great, but you aren't a swinger you are a single guy.

 

Some seem to get offended by this, and I'm not sure why. Its not saying you shouldn't do what you are doing, its just that the term 'swinger' doesn't apply.

 

Finally the whole 'lifestyle' thing. To me lifestyle couples would be the ones who's entire social calander seems to revolve around swinging events/parties/etc. Its hard to describe where that line is, but at one point we crossed it, decided it wasn't all that fun, and pulled back. I think most just use it as a euphamism for swinging, but I suppose I reseve it for those who are REALLY into swinging and being seen.

[SW_PA_Couple 4,024]

good times said:

We are a full swap couple, both straight.

We would call ourselves the same. The outmoded two-word combination would also do -- wife swapping. But husband swapping, through nobody would have used it twenty years ago, would be equally correct.

 

It is difficult to categorize but Lee has done as good a job on it as could be done. As I read though his list, "denizens of a swinger's club" came into my mind. I have never been happy with the word hobby to say you are not engaged in it to the degree of "a lifestyle". The word "pastime" would be more accurate.

[WildMiCouple 325]

We're swingers too

Guess we just outed ourselves

 

And we refer to the flirters or wannabees at clubs as Posers

That's their walk on the wild side

[WesternSwing 504]

We're a full-swap, recreational sex, poly-friendly couple.

 

What fetishes do I see today? The one that has everyone talking locally is female squirting. I'm seeing it listed prominently in profiles: "she's a squirter" and "he can make any woman squirt." We go to the club and the conversation inevitably gets steered toward squirting by someone. It's actually getting a bit old.

[VegasLee 1,486]

Something I am noticing in the responses so far is just about everyone has posted they are a "swinger" meaning they swap.

 

Daily we see many people post in these forums that they go to watch or be seen but don't swapped or have not swapped yet. Kind of wondering why those people are not posting here?

 

I know for a fact since I see over 800 people a week at the club that MOST are not swingers. Most are either soft swinging, watching or there to be watched.

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

I would say I am a swinger - once a swinger always a swinger? Although at this time in this relationship we have not gone further than soft-swinging. We just haven't had the opportunity with the right couple yet where everything worked for more than that. So where does that leave my Pet? Is he not a swinger because he has not swapped yet?

 

What fetishes do I see today? The one that has everyone talking locally is female squirting. I'm seeing it listed prominently in profiles: "she's a squirter" and "he can make any woman squirt." We go to the club and the conversation inevitably gets steered toward squirting by someone. It's actually getting a bit old.

 

I've noticed this quite a bit as well, not in person (kinda glad actually) but from other forums and whatnot. It seems like it's a big thing. I used to know one couple where the woman was a big time squirter. They didn't seem to have the attitude that I hear so much lately of "how cool is that" it was more of a hassle for her because of the extra towels required.

[CB_n_Red 16]

VegasLee said:

I know for a fact since I see over 800 people a week at the club that MOST are not swingers. Most are either soft swinging, watching or there to be watched.

 

This seems to be a developing trend in UK clubs as well, at least it is in the ones we've been to. This is the main reason why we don't go to clubs much any more. It gets a bit tedious making the effort to get talking to people only to find they have no interest in playing. We've even joked that non-swingers in clubs should wear "no entry" badges so that real swingers don't waste their time!

 

But it's no great problem for us as we have a small group of friends we see when the inclination grabs us

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

CB_n_Red said:

This seems to be a developing trend in UK clubs as well, at least it is in the ones we've been to. This is the main reason why we don't go to clubs much any more. It gets a bit tedious making the effort to get talking to people only to find they have no interest in playing. We've even joked that non-swingers in clubs should wear "no entry" badges so that real swingers don't waste their time!

 

But it's no great problem for us as we have a small group of friends we see when the inclination grabs us

 

I was thinking while reading the original post in this thread that we need armbands at the clubs to identify each group so that we know in advance what we are dealing with and like you said, don't waste our time.

[sweet_tna 680]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: We're swingers. Can't it just be that simple?

 

=)

[BiloxiCouple 695]

JustAskJulie said:

I was thinking while reading the original post in this thread that we need armbands at the clubs to identify each group so that we know in advance what we are dealing with and like you said, don't waste our time.

 

I've seen that tried once. It was fun, but didn't last.

 

It was tried with a color code. Each color that your wore (wristband provided e.g.) indicated level of play. I think the idea is still great and would distinguish the swingers from the teasers/flirts.

[good times 991]

We just haven't had the opportunity with the right couple yet where everything worked for more than that. So where does that leave my Pet? Is he not a swinger because he has not swapped yet?

I don't think that is necessarily so, if he is willing to swap and just hasn't connected with a suitable partner yet, I would say he is still what I would consider a swinger.

 

The ones I consider not swingers are the larger and larger group of people we see coming to the clubs that have no intention of ever swapping or engaging in sex with anyone other than their spouse or SO. I am starting to include those too that say they are willing, but who's fears and insecurities are at such a level as to make it almost impossible for them to find willing partners.

 

Heck, we don't swap every time we go to a club. In fact, with all of the "not swingers" coming to the club now days, we don't swap anywhere near as often as we would like when we go. Last night for example, we wasted pretty much the whole evening with a couple that we are now convinced will never swap with us. Turns out, they were interested in us, but when they found out we actually had some swinging experience, they decided we weren't their type. Turns out that due to concerns about their health, they will only play with long time married newbies. To them, anyone other than someone with no experience swinging yet in a long term monogamous relationship is too high a risk.

[Chris&Amelia 253]

Why do we insist on segregating ourselves like this? I think that Swingers tend to be a pretty broad term, as so much it's really any committed couple who engages in sexual activity with other person(s) with the full knowledge and consent of everybody involved.

 

Yeah, that's boring. I think so too.

 

That being said... full-swap couple. If, if we're gonna do this, we're gonna get the most out of it that we can! We would like to cultivate a friendship with the others if we jibe with them... but, hey, sometimes you wanna just get laid.

[xyzzy07 15]

Full swap couple, but it's sometimes hard to have all four be interested. Last weekend we hooked up with the mythical single woman at a party (never thought it would happen). It was fun but the wife missed having a guy.

 

I agree with a lot of the posters that many people come to the clubs just to flirt. At one party we were supposed to add stickers to a namebadge to indicate what we were looking for. Good idea, but it didn't work. The main problem was that the stickers were tiny and there were too many possibilities. Not only could you not see them in the dim light, but who could remember what they all meant!

 

Anyway, it's fun just to go to the parties even when things don't work out perfectly.

[The Fuse 1,012]

Something I am noticing in the responses so far is just about everyone has posted they are a "swinger" meaning they swap.

 

Daily we see many people post in these forums that they go to watch or be seen but don't swapped or have not swapped yet. Kind of wondering why those people are not posting here?

 

I know for a fact since I see over 800 people a week at the club that MOST are not swingers. Most are either soft swinging, watching or there to be watched.

Don't forget all the "swingers" whose primary activity is girl-on-girl with no real swapping. (This is not us: we are definitely full swap.)

 

As far as whether singles are swingers or other such questions, I have my own internal, somewhat squishy definitions for them. But honestly, I am too tired to split semantic hairs with others. Live and let live. Just tell me what you do, and don't do, and we'll go from there.

 

As far as why the people who go to watch or be seen aren't posting here, I think it's because they don't want to be smacked down... they know they will be accused of not being "real" swingers, but they like to think of themselves that way. If there is one thing people are touchy about, it's their self-identification.

[VegasLee 1,486]

Ok, one of the main reasons for bringing this topic up is just what we are seeing in the responses here.

 

About 30 responses and most of them are very different.

 

One was

We're swingers. Can't it just be that simple?

 

As seen here the way our minds work I guess it is no longer "just that simple."

 

Last Saturday night. At a party with over 300 people at it. With that number of people made it "harder" then need be because you had to wade through the 200+ that are not swingers. They do not play with others. They are there for many of the reasons listed here by everyone. Sorting them becomes time consuming and interesting to say the least. Why sort them? Because we wanted to find the ones that play! (was not a simple task) I noticed that some others have this same problem. The sorting can get discouraging for some.

 

Some here have pointed out that "couples" are swingers, singles are not yet they party with single women. As Laura pointed out, there are some couples that only play with single women and nothing else and many of those couples don't feel they are Swingers since they only play with Single Women.

 

Seems by the responses so far it even has some of the single men wondering if they are Swingers or not by the way some have defined Swingers. Are the single women Swingers but the Single men are not?

 

Some feel that being an exhibitionist or voyeur is part of being a Swinger yet we all know that all voyeurs and exhibitionists are not Swingers. (Is there a math problem in that one? )

 

I see in one post that not all couples can be Swingers. Only "committed married to each other couples" can be Swingers. They have defined what "couple" is to them. Even the "actions" of what that couple does has been defined as to whether they are a Swinger or not.

 

Some feel by defining "Swingers" we are "segregating" ourselves yet they limited their view of Swingers to "committed couples."

 

All the responses have been great here so far. Many because it shows just how differently people look at this "Lifestyle" and these are the people in the Lifestyle. Think about how the "outside" world looks at us since they don't really know what we are really about.

 

Being in the Adult business most of my life something I learned many years ago from fighting with the federal government and spending way to much on attorneys is definitions. The Federal government considered male-female sex or male-male sex pornography, they did NOT classify Female-Female sex as pornography.

 

In my view, all of your definitions are correct for you. That is all that matters in your life. I hate labels on people. Don't feel there is a need but as we have seen everyone does label people and define things in their own way here. I am sure there are many more that have not posted their view on what a Swinger is.

 

I like the simple term as it started out many years ago, "Recreational Sex Between Consenting Adults." No mention of couples, singles, male, female. Just simple fun for all that where involved. Yes, the old perfect world syndrome that has long gone away in our perfect world.

 

Would still like to hear from the 100's of others here that have their views on Swingers!

[Guest screaminggood]

Hi Vegas Lee,

 

What am I? A WILD WOMAN?! I was recently asked if I was a swinger by a vanilla man who was coming on to me...and I denied it because his intrepretation was that a swinger will go into a room and do anyone and everyone. I'm definitely not that...although if I could get a trusted friend or spouse to stack the room for me....well, that's different right?!

 

While we've tried the "true" swinger swapping spouses once, I didn't really like it, but I tend to think it's more because that particular couple wasn't what we thought they were, so I wouldn't rule it out in our future but it's not my priority.

 

Where does that leave us? I usually describe myself as a "bi-fem with a very happy husband!" I definitely enjoy females, oops, but wait, I'm also all over this board acknowledging that I love a good single man, too. I prefer FMF, MFM, FM, I haven't gotten to the FFFFF or FMMM....but I'm working on them!!!

[two42lovers 273]

Is there a difference between sex and swinging? If a single woman and a single man are in a non-exclusive sexual relationship, are they swinging? Two women? Two men? If so, everyone on Earth who has ever had sex is a swinger...

 

What makes it swinging? Seems like the key element is being in a committed relationship and giving one another permission to have sex with others. If you don't need permission, it's not swinging. By this way of thinking, two singles having sex is not swinging. This is not semantics. A single can have sex with whomever they wish. A person in a committed relationship needs permission - without permission they are cheaters. Granting permission is what makes it swinging.

 

A single who plays with a committed couple (or half of the couple) could be called a swinger, because s/he needs permission from both halves of the couple. By the same logic, a single who has sex with a cheater is themself a cheater. If we are to say s/he isn't the cheater, but only helping the cheater cheat, then a single isn't a swinger, but is only helping the swingers swing. (lol!)

[Chris&Amelia 253]

If we are to say s/he isn't the cheater, but only helping the cheater cheat, then a single isn't a swinger, but is only helping the swingers swing. (lol!)

 

Say that five times real quick.

 

But you do bring up a very interesting aspect about it, that I completely overlooked. "Permission". I've been knocking this around in my noggin and this does seem to be the key. The one constant that is common of all "Swingers".

[sweet_tna 680]

Is there a difference between sex and swinging? If a single woman and a single man are in a non-exclusive sexual relationship, are they swinging? Two women? Two men? If so, everyone on Earth who has ever had sex is a swinger...

 

What makes it swinging? Seems like the key element is being in a committed relationship and giving one another permission to have sex with others. If you don't need permission, it's not swinging. By this way of thinking, two singles having sex is not swinging. This is not semantics. A single can have sex with whomever they wish. A person in a committed relationship needs permission - without permission they are cheaters. Granting permission is what makes it swinging.

 

A single who plays with a committed couple (or half of the couple) could be called a swinger, because s/he needs permission from both halves of the couple. By the same logic, a single who has sex with a cheater is themself a cheater. If we are to say s/he isn't the cheater, but only helping the cheater cheat, then a single isn't a swinger, but is only helping the swingers swing. (lol!)

 

I prefer the terms knowledge and consent in this case (for me, "permission" lends an air of power to the relationship). Either way, you do make an excellent point.

 

=)

[perkygl 26]

I agree....we just like to have sex...lifestyle is something that applies to our spending habits.

[cplnuswing 4,713]

I prefer the terms knowledge and consent in this case (for me, "permission" lends an air of power to the relationship). Either way, you do make an excellent point.

=)

 

Agreed, this is the key for most, and maybe the best dividing line. Lest it be too neat and clean though, what about a couple where one gives the other consent to do whatever they want as long as they tell them about it but has no interest themselves. How about the same scenario where the one doesn't even want to know about it but are fine with it happening. Are both members of the couple swingers, even though only one actually participates in the physical act but the the gives consent without participating in any way?

 

Just to put ourselves in a category, we're a full swap couple to whom swinging is a hobby. We are learning though not to self-define ourselves too strongly since that leads to expectations, instead better to have no expectations other than having fun, go with the flow, and see where things lead.

[sweet_tna 680]

Agreed, this is the key for most, and maybe the best dividing line. Lest it be too neat and clean though, what about a couple where one gives the other consent to do whatever they want as long as they tell them about it but has no interest themselves. How about the same scenario where the one doesn't even want to know about it but are fine with it happening. Are both members of the couple swingers, even though only one actually participates in the physical act but the the gives consent without participating in any way?

 

Just to put ourselves in a category, we're a full swap couple to whom swinging is a hobby. We are learning though not to self-define ourselves too strongly since that leads to expectations, instead better to have no expectations other than having fun, go with the flow, and see where things lead.

 

That, my friend, is the kind of hair splitting I prefer to avoid. And for the record, we're pretty much in the same "category" as you.

 

=)

[cplnuswing 4,713]

That, my friend, is the kind of hair splitting I prefer to avoid. And for the record, we're pretty much in the same "category" as you.

 

=)

 

That was my point

 

Anytime you try to define something like this in nice little neat boxes, it can get out of hand, really to no end or purpose. We all know what we are or are not in our minds, and that is what matters, not how we fit into the box in someone else's mind.

[Thrax 384]

two42lovers said:

A single who plays with a committed couple (or half of the couple) could be called a swinger, because s/he needs permission from both halves of the couple.

I might not be a swinger, but apparently I'm an enabler.

 

[rpu3 630]

How do you define yourself within the Lifestyle?

How do you define the terms that are used in today’s Lifestyle?

Are there other “fetishes” that you believe are common within today’s Lifestyle?

 

I am what I am and nothing more, lifestyle or not. Maybe I'm a swinger to some, maybe not to others and even that could be just whatever I am at that particular time.

 

I've spent so much time trying to figure out what I am and if I fit with "the lifestyle" in I'd exhausted myself. I don't really need a label or definition as much as I thought I did, and it probably isn't too necessary for me to try to define others. I'm more relieved at times to see words like VegasLee's:

 

All of us have our own views and ways we define the Lifestyle and our personal experiences within this Lifestyle. Does not make any of them right or wrong, just different and that is a good thing.

[two42lovers 273]

what about a couple where one gives the other consent to do whatever they want as long as they tell them about it but has no interest themselves. How about the same scenario where the one doesn't even want to know about it but are fine with it happening. Are both members of the couple swingers, even though only one actually participates in the physical act but the the gives consent without participating in any way?

 

Strictly speaking, no. Only the one who plays is swinging, the other is giving consent. In cases where one partner is actually there watching, but otherwise doesn't participate, it does get to be a pretty fine line -lol- but I guess I'd say if they are in the room watching, they are part of it. If they are not there, they're not.

[socolais 696]

This discussion is great!! One thing I haven't seen specified is about beginners finding their way into the activities and still discovering their comfort zone. I think they get an automattic alibis - for at least a while and I'm not sure the calendar has much relavence here.

 

I'm not sure when someone no longer qualifies as a beginner, but I'm generally willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt.

[good times 991]

I'm not sure when someone no longer qualifies as a beginner, but I'm generally willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt.

You are no longer a newbie after the first time you get home and neither one of you can remember the names of the people you had sex with that night.

 

As far as defining swingers go, I still prefer the general, "those who have sex solely for recreational purposes." In other words, I wouldn't exclude singles but would exclude voyeurs and exhibitionists.

 

I also agree with what VegasLee said above, it gets very discouraging sometimes for us, trying to weed through all of the voyeurs, exhibitionists, and folks coming to the club for the "sexually charged atmosphere", to find the few actual swingers.

[Chicup 41]

I'd like to expand a bit why I personally would only put committed couples as swingers.

 

If swingers just meant you were free and open to casual no strings sex than I've been a swinger since I figured out how my penis worked. I can't say a couples situation came up but if it would have as a single I would have and I did know people where it did happen.

 

Hell I'd guess college was all about swinging. I even met a fellow swinger there, I married her.

 

So to me using the term on a single doesn't convey anything beyond 'likes casual sex'.

 

Now perhaps just likes casual sex is enough to be called a swinger.

 

I'm fine with that, but then I'd like another term for couples who do this as the dynamic is completely different than singles. When my wife and I go to a club I share very little in common with a single male in terms of risk and trust, we are not the same.

[TNT 1,155]

Chicup said:

 

So to me using the term on a single doesn't convey anything beyond 'likes casual sex'.

 

I see your point with casual sex not being considered swinging but...'likes casual group sex' is different. Married people do not hold a monopoly on liking casual group (three or more people) sex.

 

Quote

When my wife and I go to a club I share very little in common with a single male in terms of risk and trust, we are not the same.

 

Again true, you have risk and trust issues within your relationship but...singles (male and female) share the same common risks and trust issues as anyone who is married/attached when it comes to casual group sex.

 

There is the risk of being outed. The risk of STDs. The risk of someone freaking out on you. Safety risks. A single has to trust the people they play with just like married/attached couples do that these risks won't become an issue.

 

Married/attached, single, triads, quads...all share the same common risks of swinging (casual, NSA, recreational group sex) IMO

 

Teresa

[tscpl 93]

We are just a fun loving couple and easy to get on with.Lets keep it simple!We are not into excessive over defining of ourselves on a public medium.

[WesternSwing 504]

Something I am noticing in the responses so far is just about everyone has posted they are a "swinger" meaning they swap.

 

Daily we see many people post in these forums that they go to watch or be seen but don't swapped or have not swapped yet. Kind of wondering why those people are not posting here?

 

I know for a fact since I see over 800 people a week at the club that MOST are not swingers. Most are either soft swinging, watching or there to be watched.

This is a huge trend in our community. We have three different organizations that host club parties. When we first got into swinging it was with a couple that runs one of these groups and they used to do nothing but throw sexy house parties that were a mix of swingers and open-minded non-swingers. Then their parties went more fully swinger and the attendance dropped. When they started renting clubs for a night and hosting parties there, they invited both swingers and open-minded non-swingers because just swingers alone would not financially support the event.

 

So what we've seen is out of necessity the party and event organizers are inviting a more mixed crowd because you just can't do one of these events and make money off them with just swingers. The difference in turn-out is 150 to 200 swingers or 400 - 500 swingers and non-swingers combined. And that's what these parties are, money making ventures for the organizers and the club owner.

[WesternSwing 504]

I was thinking while reading the original post in this thread that we need armbands at the clubs to identify each group so that we know in advance what we are dealing with and like you said, don't waste our time.

Continuing my post from above, one of the organizers used to lease a warehouse and had it made into a club where they threw their parties. They had a VIP room where real swingers could go to play and the non-swingers were not allowed in, even to just watch. It worked okay, but still, not many swingers took advantage of it because of the huge amount "I wanna just see what's going on in there" people. Now they host their parties at regular clubs that they rent out for a night so it is closed to public access, but being a normally public club no nudity or sex is allowed or they'd lose their business license.

[WesternSwing 504]

This discussion is great!! One thing I haven't seen specified is about beginners finding their way into the activities and still discovering their comfort zone. I think they get an automattic alibis - for at least a while and I'm not sure the calendar has much relavence here.

 

I'm not sure when someone no longer qualifies as a beginner, but I'm generally willing to give someone the benefit of the doubt.

I agree, they do. But if after so many times seeing them if they haven't progressed at all, than they start to get passed-over and ignored other than in a friendly chit-chat kind of way.

[two42lovers 273]

Married/attached, single, triads, quads...all share the same common risks of swinging

 

There are many risks they share in common, as you say, but the in a most important way single players are very different from marrieds. The risk of sharing your spouse sexually has no parallel for singles. Singles don't have to trust someone with their spouse, they don't have to trust their spouse, and they don't have the relationship risks and challenges. This adds up to a huge difference, IMO.

 

When people in a committed relationship agree to share each other sexually, the sharing is between them, even though the sex is with others. It's a gift they give to each other: the gift of sex with others. There is nothing of the kind for singles. Doesn't make one better, or more "real", but it does make the whole thing very, very different in nature. We are all part of the lifestyle, but strictly speaking, only committed partners can "swing".

[Chicup 41]

I see your point with casual sex not being considered swinging but...'likes casual group sex' is different. Married people do not hold a monopoly on liking casual group (three or more people) sex.

 

No they don't but thats not the question. The question is should there be a differentiation between a single and a couple that do and I say yes. Also you have added a dimension to the definition. Now its about group sex? So separate room swapping is not swinging? So the implication I get is that swinging is liking group sex, period, and I don't agree with that.

 

Again true, you have risk and trust issues within your relationship but...singles (male and female) share the same common risks and trust issues as anyone who is married/attached when it comes to casual group sex.

 

Hardly the same. As a single I only have to worry about myself, not what is the love of my life. Its one thing to put yourself at some sort of risk, its another to put someone else you really love at risk. If I were to go skydiving with my wife, I worry about her safety more than my own, and swinging is a lot like skydiving. Its a thrill, its a lot of fun, but its an unnecessary risk so I worry about her safety and happiness before I worry about my own.

 

There is the risk of being outed.

 

Worker 1: Did you hear John was at a 'swingers' party?

Worker 2: Damn no wonder he is single.

 

Worker 1: Did you hear Jan was at that swingers club?

Worker 2: Jan? Shes married with three kids, does her husband know?

Worker 1: From what I hear he was there with her, I wonder if he watched her get fucked.

Worker 2: God what perverts, how can they do that when they have kids! I need to tell Jim about this.

 

A true side note, where my wife used to work, a single guy there used to wear his Hedo II shirts to work all the time (polo). My wife knew what it was, and I'd guess others would know too, but being single no one thought twice of it. I can only imagine the reaction my wife would have gotten wearing the same type of shirt.

 

The risk of STDs.

 

Same as casual sex.

 

The risk of someone freaking out on you. Safety risks. A single has to trust the people they play with just like married/attached couples do that these risks won't become an issue.

 

Same risks anyone takes meeting new people at a bar, doesn't make them swingers to me. Makes them single people (guys) who are finding a new sexual outlet.

 

Married/attached, single, triads, quads...all share the same common risks of swinging (casual, NSA, recreational group sex) IMO.

 

They share some of the risks, and even less of the motivations beyond getting laid. Swinging really transformed our relationship into something special and stronger than a vast majority of marriages out there. A single has a good time and makes some friends.

[TNT 1,155]

two42lovers said:

only committed partners can "swing".

 

By your definition of swinging...which, I believe is what this thread boils down to...everyone's own definition of swinging and if they are a swinger.

 

Chicup said:

Also you have added a dimension to the definition.

 

Exactly! There are dimensions upon dimensions when it comes to defining what is and what is not swinging and who is or is not a swinger. Everyone's definition will be different. No one being right or wrong.

 

What swinging is to Ted and I, as a couple and as individuals, will be totally different for someone else.

 

As it is with life in general, few things are ever black or white...just different shades of gray...swinging is no different. All a person can do is define what it means to them or what they want it to mean, seek out those who think/feel the same way and let the fun begin.

 

Teresa

[WesternSwing 504]

We are all part of the lifestyle, but strictly speaking, only committed partners can "swing".

I agree with this statement. When the accepted definition of swinging is "when a married or otherwise committed couple engages in recreational sex with other couples or singles" this means swinging is a "couples" activity that may include singles. To me, singles are simply having casual, recreational sex, they are not "swinging" by any true definition of the word used in a sexual context. Now they may be swingers based on playing the field and not wanting to settle down and having many sexual partners. But they are not swinging in the context of what a couple does and has to go through to do this.

[two42lovers 273]

By your definition of swinging...

 

Yes - and of course that's exactly what the OP asked us to share. We use the word swinging to mean committed partners playing with the consent of their partner. The word "lifestyle" includes anyone and everyone who is into alternative-to-the-norm-of-society sexuality.

 

People can get a little sensitive about the word "swinger". There seems to be a fair amount of emotional investment (for some) about being designated as a "swinger" - or not. Guess it's a little bit like asking an existentialist "what is truth?" Of course s/he will answer "truth is internal, YOUR truth is what is true to YOU." This may fly (for some) when talking about spiritual ideas, but why put the word "swinging" in the same category? The issue seems to be whether we approach the question deductively or inductively.

 

It's true, communication is itself existentialist. Words mean what the hearer thinks they mean, not what the speaker intends. Words can't be understood any other way. This is the challenge with interpersonal communication - doubly so when we have to rely only on written words absent non-verbal cues. (A lot of communication is achieved non-verbally.) Even so, it doesn't seem like the issue is people understanding the word differently. The issue is if the word has any concrete meaning at all, or if it always ever only expresses a subjective meaning.

 

We sure could just say, "who cares? Let's party!" (and by and large it's how we feel.) But there is a BIG difference between committed partners giving each other consent to play, and single people who have no partner and need no permission. The commitment is the key to what the sexual sharing is about. Under the right set of circumstances swinging is a relationship-enhancing adventure partners share with each other. The word used doesn't matter, but the experience is very different.

[Guest ic7175]

We aren't swingers. More of a couple with a FWB couple to play with. We learn a lot from reading on here but we really don't think we are swingers. According to Good Times' post we would be newbies forever because we wouldn't ever get to the "what was their names?" point of partying. Sounds fun , just not for us.

 

We do soft swap (MF, FMF, MFM, FF) including oral, basically anything but intercourse is fair game, and it has all been so much fun.

 

Here's part of my first post that describes how we feel...

 

Quote

I've been a long time lurker, even prior to registering, and have learned a lot about the lifestyle. In our case it helped us understand that we probably aren't swingers. We do things that swingers tend to frown upon, soft swing play with friends and being exclusive. But we honestly can't see either of us being comfortable swinging at a party with people we just met.

 

I understand the issues people have faced with the friends thing but we find that we are more comfortable with the idea that we have a couple that we are in a FWB situation. That seems to more closely match our desires than swinging.

 

A decade ago, my wife and I visited a swing club for the free tour, so it's not that we aren't willing to consider swinging. We were looking into a BiF at that time and never got close to having that happen. Over nearly a decade, we got closer and closer (in very small steps) to FWB by playing ever more risque games when we got together with a specific couple. One night a couple years ago, the other husband just came out and asked how far things could go and everyone be OK. We all talked, each couple talked, then we all talked again and we agreed to take a bigger step the next time we got together. Afterwards each couple talked to make sure all were OK and we've continued down that path since. After some initial shock that it actually happened everyone felt it turned out better than we even hoped.

[Chris&Amelia 253]

ic7175... based on the description you gave, in my eyes, you are indeed a swinger. Just because (1) you play with only one couple and (2) you keep it at soft swap, in my opinion, does not mean you're not a swinger.

 

And I don't want to put words into Good Times' mouth, but I think they were kidding...

 

...can't say that we've ever had sex with people who's names we don't know (now, I've forgotten some names...), but I definitely consider ourselves swingers.

[safireblues 106]

No, I'm not a swinger anymore. Not at this moment. I think I approached it from the wrong way, wanting attention to fill up a void in myself that I should be filling up on my own. With dildos. Heh. Kidding about that last bit.

 

I am certain I will have a few more experiences with my husband, but I think the "polyamorous" side of my desires has come to a close.