The Single Male - Swinger??

[SecretAsianMan 348]

Here's something which I've been pondering for years... exactly what is that differentiates a "single male" in this lifestyle from any other red-blooded male looking for sex-partners & a good time??

 

Is it simply his willingness to not become overly emotionally bonded with the people he's sexual with? (Which is usually not an issue with MOST single-males in or out in the lifestyle)

 

Is is his willingness to be with couples as a third / -fourth / -fifth / etc. ? (I'd give odds that most single guys wouldn't have many issues with this either)

 

Or is it his willingness to continue with this lifestyle even after he's "acquired" a partner??

 

So ... what is it, in your opinion that makes a single guy a "swinger" versus just being a "regular guy" ?

[Dynamar 246]

I'd say all of the above. To me, any single (male or female) looking to participate in the lifestyle differentiates him/herself from vanilla singles by the venues they choose in which to find casual sex.

 

Swingers seek out lifestyle websites, clubs and house parties. Many swingers are open to playing with couples or in groups, or participating in bi-sexual activity.

 

Vanillas use dating sites, bars and nightclubs. Many vanillas (although not all... I'm not making a blanket statement here) are pretty much serially monogamous.

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

To me it's his understanding of all involved. There are single males (and even females) who want to swing and who do actually play with couples but I would not consider them SWINGERS for the simple reason of they lack the understanding of what is required on the part of the couples. They don't realize that yes these couples really do love each other and are committed to each other. They don't understand the boundaries that are in place or why they are there. These are often the same single males that are perfectly ok with being a third or with having sex with some other guys wife, but if you asked them if they would swing if they were in a committed relationship the answer would be "hell no, I respect my woman too much for that" or "hell no, I couldn't watch my woman with someone else". Again basically proving that they really don't get where the couples involved are coming from.

 

The difference is the attitude.

[Opportunists 17]

I would not consider them SWINGERS for the simple reason of they lack the understanding of what is required on the part of the couples. .

 

My best friend is a SM who owns our local LS club [he started it with his SO, but they split a couple of years ago]...

 

Because he is so well known and liked among the couples in town, he is always invited to couples only house parties, area clubs etc.

 

However, he has told me that he no longer considers himself a 'swinger' because he's single.

 

We would tend to agree... if you are single, then you might be moving within the lifestyle, but essentially you are dating/seeking sex as you would in a singles bar... but you're not really swinging... at least IOurO.

[SecretAsianMan 348]

I guess then maybe I'm only a "borderline" swinger ... I do it when I'm single (and would do it with a partner if she were also into the lifestyle) - but my last few relationships have all been fairly monogamous.

 

Or maybe I don't really fall into a category

[lustylearning 705]

I guess then maybe I'm only a "borderline" swinger ... I do it when I'm single (and would do it with a partner if she were also into the lifestyle) - but my last few relationships have all been fairly monogamous.

 

Or maybe I don't really fall into a category

 

Eh, whatever. You're still welcome here:D

[NumbskullsX2 24]

Here's something which I've been pondering for years... exactly what is that differentiates a "single male" in this lifestyle from any other red-blooded male looking for sex-partners & a good time??

Nothing, because there is no difference. Most single guys like to fuck. If they're horny enough, they'll fuck anything. Fat women. Old women. Other guys wives. Other guys AND their wives. Guys dressed up like other guys wives. Single males will fuck anything and anybody, and those who hang around swingers clubs and websites aren't "swingers," they're opportunists.

So ... what is it, in your opinion that makes a single guy a "swinger" versus just being a "regular guy" ?

Nothing really, but if a single guy were to say "Hey, would any of you like to fuck my girlfriend? I'll just stand here and watch" he might have a little more credibility as a "swinger."

I guess then maybe I'm only a "borderline" swinger ... I do it when I'm single (and would do it with a partner if she were also into the lifestyle) - but my last few relationships have all been fairly monogamous.

NOW we're getting to the heart of the matter, the "litmus test" that defines whether you're a swinger or not. I think you answered your own question

 

"Single male swingers" do NOT have "monogamous relationships" with women who are not in the lifestyle.

 

This lifestyle is obviously a very important part of your life. Why would you want to be in a "monogamous relationship" with somebody who doesn't share it with you? Is it like Julie said, that you "respect your woman too much" to bring her around people like us?

 

Personally, and this is just my own, PERSONAL opinion, I think ALL swingers start out as couples. I believe it's the only way you can truly know all the emotions and issues that are involved in this. Sometimes, when a person becomes single either through death or divorce, they can continue in the lifestyle as a "single swinger" if they choose. We know 2 males and 1 female who did just that for a while, but now they've all dropped out until they find new partners.

 

I don't think you can go from being a "single male" to a "single swinging male" without passing "Married swinging couple"

[Dynamar 246]

Personally, and this is just my own, PERSONAL opinion, I think ALL swingers start out as couples. I believe it's the only way you can truly know all the emotions and issues that are involved in this. Sometimes, when a person becomes single either through death or divorce, they can continue in the lifestyle as a "single swinger" if they choose. We know 2 males and 1 female who did just that for a while, but now they've all dropped out until they find new partners.

 

I don't think you can go from being a "single male" to a "single swinging male" without passing "Married swinging couple"

Warning: alert!

 

And what if you're a single female? Who's never been involved in the lifestyle as half of a committed couple?

 

Your opinion may be your opinion, and you're by all means entitled to it. But you kinda muss up your logic when you use the word ALL. Because this swinger did not start as a couple. [/threadjack]

[SecretAsianMan 348]

"Single male swingers" do NOT have "monogamous relationships" with women who are not in the lifestyle.

 

This lifestyle is obviously a very important part of your life. Why would you want to be in a "monogamous relationship" with somebody who doesn't share it with you? Is it like Julie said, that you "respect your woman too much" to bring her around people like us?

 

I don't think you can go from being a "single male" to a "single swinging male" without passing "Married swinging couple"

 

I've personally never really sought to "limit" my choice in the women I enter into relationships with. Some of them have been into the lifestyle... others have not... but all have known about my experience in the lifestyle. It's a part of my life - but not the only part of it.

 

It's not that I "respect her too much to bring her around" - but I do respect that if she's not interested in the lifestyle, I shouldn't force it upon her. I still introduce her to all my friends (swingers, polyamorous, monogamous, gay, straight, bisexual, etc.) and we even attend social events together with all these people.

 

... (shrug) ... but this isn't a thread to define "my" role in the lifestyle. I'm fairly comfortable in my role and probably won't be changing that. I feel this thread has started to focus a little too much on "me" ... let's get back to the original question:

 

Single male "swingers" ... what defines them (in your eyes) and what makes them different from "regular" non-monogamous single males in society?

 

EDIT:

 

The previous poster above me brings up a good point as well... we could open up this discussion to be about "singles" in general in the swinger-scene.

 

(I like this... the discussion is actually starting to really get good / in-depth)

[two42lovers 273]

We really like Julie's definition, but then started thinking...

 

Are couples who only do threesomes with one gender swingers? (For example, if they play with women only, because they are not comfortable with the female-half playing with other men?) We'd say yes, but that means guys who are not OK with their wives playing with other guys can still be swingers...

 

As far as we can tell, the only common denominator for swingers is honesty with their play-partners, and doing everything above board and with the consent of their significant other.

 

If you are solo your circumstances are very different as compared to couples. Whether singles are "swingers" or not depends on how you define the word. Singles can certainly be players in the lifestyle just like married couples. Singles have no commitment to a spouse, so the the whole notion of recreational sex is very different for them, and the "eye-glass" they see swingdom through is also very different.

[VegasLee 1,486]

Many years ago when the Swinging Lifestyle was outed the definition for swinging was "Recreational sex between consenting adults".

 

Over the years many in their own minds have narrowed that definition to fit their OWN Lifestyle.

 

Does not mean they are right or wrong, but only what fits them.

 

Forget the titles, do what works for you as long as you are not hurting others.

 

No reason to try to limit others to be what you want them to be, it is not your place in life to make rules for others, only for your self.

[two42lovers 273]

Many years ago when the Swinging Lifestyle was outed the definition for swinging was "Recreational sex between consenting adults".

 

So two guys having recreational sex in a public toilet is swinging? (Seems to fit your definition perfectly.)

 

The OP is asking what is the difference is between singles in the lifestyle verses singles who simply enjoy sex outside the bounds of committment. Whether or not singles are called "swingers" or "players" - or any term - is irrelevant. Couples who play are not better or more real than singles who play - but singles and couples have very different perspectives and objectives.

 

The question is a good one - what is the difference, if any, between "regular" singles who have casual/no-committments sex, and "lifestyle" singles?

[VegasLee 1,486]

So two guys having recreational sex in a public toilet is swinging? (Seems to fit your definition perfectly.)

 

 

Your right, that would have fit the definition that was in the dictionary 30 years ago.

 

I guess two women having sex in a public toilet would have been considered the same.

 

The Definition was only changed about 20 years ago when Dr. McGinley kept harping at the main Dictionary companies about adding "couples" to the definition. Now I am saying that because that is a statement he has made proudly many times over the years. He takes credit of the change of the definition after he started the Lifestyles Org.

 

Still does not make it right or wrong, just his view and what he has preached for years.

 

Bottom line is none of these "titles" mean anything to anyone except the one defining them.

[two42lovers 273]

Interesting. Even so, just because some guy somewhere at some point in time said "recreational sex" is the definition of swinging doesn't make it so. People have said a lot of things about sex for a lot of reasons over the years, and many have stated their opinions with great certainty. (Even to the point of jailing those who didn't go along - but that's a different subject.)

 

If an uncommitted person having consentual sex is all it takes to be a swinger, all the world are swingers.

 

No reason to try to limit others to be what you want them to be, it is not your place in life to make rules for others, only for your self.

 

Totally agree, but what does it have to do with discussing the differences, if any, between "regular" singles who have casual/no-committments sex, and "lifestyle" singles? If there is no difference, why do so many say couples should look for singles in the lifestyle, verses vanilla singles who don't know the "rules"? (If those vanilla singles like recreational sex, they ARE swingers according to your definition.)

[LikeMinds321 1,527]

Here's how I see it.

 

Married couples (or even unmarried couples in a committed relationship who are living together in all ways as married people do - may even have children) are what makes swinging exist. Without couples, as I've described, there would be no swinging.

 

Singles are part of swinging because of couples, and if they are having sex with couples, or even one of a couple, they are swingers too.

 

Singles who I don't consider swingers are those who use swinger ad sites and clubs soley as an avenue to meet other singles. They never play with couples in any form nor have any intention of doing so. There are a few of those around.

 

LM

[Opportunists 17]

the definition for swinging was "Recreational sex between consenting adults".

 

i always thought the definition of swinging would have to involve going BACK and FORTH.... two directions. would seem that would mean two people [couple].

[NumbskullsX2 24]

And what if you're a single female? Who's never been involved in the lifestyle as half of a committed couple?

 

Your opinion may be your opinion, and you're by all means entitled to it. But you kinda muss up your logic when you use the word ALL. Because this swinger did not start as a couple.

I still think you make your bones as a swinger when you participate in it with someone you love. Not just "like," but LOVE.

 

I had a couple 3-somes as a young man. (they found me, I didn't go lookig for them) They took a little "adjustment" on my part, but neither one was anywhere near as much of a mind-fuck as the first time I watched my lovely wife with another man. Not even close!

 

You said you've "never been involved in the lifestyle as half of a committed couple." If you met the man of your dreams, and were in the relationship of your dreams with him. Could you still be in this lifetsyle with him? THAT'S how you know when your a swinger.

[NumbskullsX2 24]

I've personally never really sought to "limit" my choice in the women I enter into relationships with. Some of them have been into the lifestyle... others have not... but all have known about my experience in the lifestyle. It's a part of my life - but not the only part of it.

 

It's not that I "respect her too much to bring her around" - but I do respect that if she's not interested in the lifestyle, I shouldn't force it upon her. I still introduce her to all my friends (swingers, polyamorous, monogamous, gay, straight, bisexual, etc.) and we even attend social events together with all these people.

Your argument sounds almost word-for-word loike the ones we get all the time from "married men playing alone".

 

"My sex drive is much higher than my wife's"

 

"I would include her in my lifestyle, but she's not interested. And NO, you can't ask her about it"

 

"She knows I'm doing this. She just doesn't want to know the details"

 

If we were looking for a single male, we would actually be MORE sympathetic to the "married but plays alone" male, because we know how tough it is to leave a stagnant marriage. A guy who wants to be in the lifestyle, and is merely dating a woman who isn't is wasting his time AND hers. And OURS.

 

So back to your original question - "Single male "swingers" ... what defines them (in your eyes) and what makes them different from "regular" non-monogamous single males in society?"

 

Answer - With very few exceptions, there are no "true" single male swingers, only single male "wannabe's" and single male "don'twannashares" What makes the "wannabe's" different is that they spend WAYYYY too much time (and money) trying to break into this lifestyle. What makes the "don'twannashares" different from your average, "marriedbutplaysalone" male is that the married male is probably trying to preserve some vestige of family life but the "dontwannashare" is just trying to play both ends of the fence.

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

Many years ago when the Swinging Lifestyle was outed the definition for swinging was "Recreational sex between consenting adults".

 

 

I have an automatic recording set up on my tivo to record anything that has "swinger" in the title or description. This morning it was recording an old movie from the 60's "Boy's Night out" about 4 "would-be swingers who share a sexy blonde that is secretly doing a thesis on men". I watched about 10 minutes of it and at least 2 of the four were obviously married. Combine that with other movies from the era that follow the same line and it's apparant where the term started. Heck, look at Austin Powers and how well those movies have re-invigorated the idea of the single male "swinger".

[SecretAsianMan 348]

Your argument sounds almost word-for-word loike the ones we get all the time from "married men playing alone".

 

"My sex drive is much higher than my wife's"

 

"I would include her in my lifestyle, but she's not interested. And NO, you can't ask her about it"

 

"She knows I'm doing this. She just doesn't want to know the details"

 

If we were looking for a single male, we would actually be MORE sympathetic to the "married but plays alone" male, because we know how tough it is to leave a stagnant marriage. A guy who wants to be in the lifestyle, and is merely dating a woman who isn't is wasting his time AND hers. And OURS.

 

Okay - I hate to be confrontational here... but why do you keep bringing this topic back to the specifics of "my role" in this lifestyle and attacking my statements?? I didn't bring up this topic to justify my own reasons for doing what I do - nor am I going to debate how I define myself or what terms I should or should not use in the definition of my place in this lifestyle. (And that's certainly not something I'd care to do in a public forum such as this)

 

Quite honestly - to lump me in with those 'bad-apples' who use the lifestyle as nothing more than a meat-market to get their rocks off or to cheat on their wives/girlfriends when you don't even know me is just bad form and rude.

 

One of the things I've really liked about most of the people I know in this lifestyle is their passion and respect for others and the lifestyle that those others have chosen for themselves.

 

You've got plenty of passion, I'll give you that...

 

So back to your original question - "Single male "swingers" ... what defines them (in your eyes) and what makes them different from "regular" non-monogamous single males in society?"

 

Answer - With very few exceptions, there are no "true" single male swingers, only single male "wannabe's" and single male "don'twannashares" What makes the "wannabe's" different is that they spend WAYYYY too much time (and money) trying to break into this lifestyle. What makes the "don'twannashares" different from your average, "marriedbutplaysalone" male is that the married male is probably trying to preserve some vestige of family life but the "dontwannashare" is just trying to play both ends of the fence.

 

Okay - I respect that you honestly don't believe in the whole concept of a "single swinger". Thank you.

 

So, everyone else ... ?

[SamuiCouple 70]

Good question, and obviously hard to define.

 

Personally I think it lies in the type of sex a single is drawn to.

 

For most couples swinging is about sharing. The experience of having sex with another person/couple, be it same room/separate rooms/whatever brings them closer together because it is not only about the sex, it is about sharing an exotic (and as a kicker, taboo) flavor of sexuality. The single who understands this, AND has the same craving for what is in effect a mind-fuck, is most sought after but unfortunately rare.

 

There is a wide range of types of sex singles pursue, ranging from the basic instinct type of sex that drives them to prostitutes, monogamous sex that mostly involves some kind of romantic feelings and craving the mind-fuck that being shared by a couple brings.

 

It's a flavor all by itself. Hard to explain. An ambiance if you will.

 

I disagree that a single cannot be a swinger unless he/she is prepared to swing with a future partner. The kick a swinging single gets is different from the kick the couple gets out of swinging. A different flavor.

 

But that is the point. It's a unique flavor of sex. Not the same as 'swinging with say 2 other singles who form a 'couple' for the sole purpose of swinging. It is about the bond within the couple, and the dynamic it creates. Without that bond the flavor changes.

 

And that's why it is so hard to find a good single male swing partner in a sea of available single males. Most single males are still chasing the simpler flavors They don't even understand why the couples swing, witness the proliferation of alpha behavior in single males trying to swing.

 

The buzz is in the relationship. For all parties, just in different ways.

 

 

 

 

 

Ok, that's part of the argument. A bit holey, but sounds nice

 

Let's say swinging singles are those looking for a certain range of flavors. To be defined.

 

 

I hate how this spell checker keeps changing flavour to flavor.

[MRSfun 152]

SecretAsianMan, How do you define yourself in the lifestyle ?

 

What makes you different from a regular vanilla guy wanting to hook up ?

[Dynamar 246]

I still think you make your bones as a swinger when you participate in it with someone you love. Not just "like," but LOVE.

 

I had a couple 3-somes as a young man. (they found me, I didn't go lookig for them) They took a little "adjustment" on my part, but neither one was anywhere near as much of a mind-fuck as the first time I watched my lovely wife with another man. Not even close!

 

You said you've "never been involved in the lifestyle as half of a committed couple." If you met the man of your dreams, and were in the relationship of your dreams with him. Could you still be in this lifetsyle with him? THAT'S how you know when your a swinger.

And you can think it... but when you try to down other people for how they participate, that's where you go wrong. There's lots of fish in the proverbial sea... so play with couples and ignore singles. Good on you. But why, as SecretAsianMan points out, be so vehement in dissing singles, be they male or female? What did we ever do to you?

 

In answer to your question, the answer is "Yes"... he wouldn't be the man of my dreams if we couldn't be in the lifestyle.

[lurkergirl 47]

I still think you make your bones as a swinger when you participate in it with someone you love. Not just "like," but LOVE.

 

I kinda take exception to this statement. The honey and I have never played with another couple (it's just never worked out this way), we've never had a MFM, and I tend to think that the FMF's that we've done only qualify us as "open and a little freaky", not as swingers.

 

He doesn't attend the local swingers club with me, I go alone (yes, with his permission) and I play with whomever I feel like, some nights it's single guys, some nights it's couples.

 

So, I've never participated in the couples realm of swinging with someone I love (i.e. the honey). But, I don't feel that it makes us any less "swingers", as we're not adverse to couple play, just not versed in it. I can get a medical degree, and call myself a doctor whether I ever see the first patient or not. I'm still licensed to perform CPR, even if I never see the first person lying on the sidewalk in need of my help.

 

What people are isn't something that anyone other than themselves can define. I am what I say I am, regardless of what anyone else thinks about how well I fit into their definitions. I'm not saying that our definitions have to agree...you may think you're a cowboy, and I may suspect that the closest you've ever come to a cow was when you stopped at Dairy Queen to take a piss. But, in your mind, you've learned to ride a horse, rope a steer, and make coffee in a can. You qualify. If I don't agree with your definition, I'm free to not invite you to my roundup.

 

I think people put entirely too much emphasis on what others definitions of swinging/swingers are. And until we come up with a concrete Webster's style definition, we'll just continue pointing fingers and saying "he is, they aren't, she was, etc." Then we'll need sub-categories for all the different styles of play, and sub-sub-categories defined by rules for play, and isn't it a lot easier to just say "Plays well with others, they must be a swinger"?

[SecretAsianMan 348]

SecretAsianMan, How do you define yourself in the lifestyle ?

 

What makes you different from a regular vanilla guy wanting to hook up ?

 

 

Y'know - I'm really not sure. I'm not even necessarily sure I *can* be defined as a "swinger" per se... but then again - is that really necessary to label myself as anything in particular? I'm "me" - whatever that entails.

 

I'm a single guy ... I have friends who are in the lifestyle and I've participated with them in swinging. I've been in relationships (boyfriend & girlfriend - never been married) where we have swung together.

 

I'm not really sure I'm all THAT different from "a regular guy wanting to hook up" (granted - I'd hesitate to use the term "vanilla" in a description of me & my particular sexual likes & dislikes - but that's a whole different episode of Oprah... *chuckling*)

 

I guess the difference for me is ... if my partner (girlfriend, whatever) would be open to the experience - I would gladly share this experience with her. And I would still love her and not judge her regardless of her desire (or lack thereof) to participate.

[two42lovers 273]

Interesting thoughts - also interesting to hear the various ways people read the various posts. Only goes to remind us words mean what the hearer thinks they mean, not what the speaker thinks or intends.

 

I can get a medical degree, and call myself a doctor whether I ever see the first patient or not.

 

That works if you see "swinging" in terms of a personal philosopy independant of actions, but not so well if "swinging" means specific behaviors. If you say you are a doc because you went to med school, then yes, you are a doctor. But instead of the word "doctor" try using the term "practicing physician". (Changes the whole point of the statement, and no, you would not be a practicing physician if you have never seen a patient. Yes, we can call anybody anything, but no, just because someone is a "cowboy" in their own mind doesn't mean they are a cowboy who works with cattle. If we're having a round-up and we need cowboys, we need real cowboys -lol!)

 

I think people put entirely too much emphasis on what others definitions of swinging/swingers are.

 

But we have to pay attention to other people's definitions. Swinging involves an agreement bewteen people to have sex. The way people define it is all-important. Suppose a couple see's themselves as "swingers" but they have never played. If you ask them "are you swingers?" their "yes" is going to mean something very different than if you asked the same question to a couple who actually plays.

 

People come to SB to think about and discuss swinging. To say everyone has their own definition, and no definition is any better than another, is a judgemental statement. It cuts off people from discussing, and implies anyone who chooses not to be existential in their approach is bad and wrong.

 

In our opinion, a single who knows how to play well with a couple is worth their weight in gold. Whether a single is in that catagory, and what defines it, is what this thread is about. The OP asks some good questions. Defining what swinging is, and how/if singles fit, is worthwhile because it gives everyone a chance to think things through, hear from others, and perhaps come to a better, more thoughtful pespective.

[lurkergirl 47]

two42lovers, You made some beautiful points (and used existential in a sentence, always impressive).

 

I do tend to be a little reactionary about being defined by others, so I'll put some serious thought into the points you brought up, and I appreciate you putting the "practicing physician" spin on it.

 

I think that the overall point to what I was trying to get across is that, regardless of what we (the people posting in this particular thread) define as swingers, the essence of whether the OP is a "swinger" or not is basically going to be defined by the OP's perception of what he is, perhaps in concurrence with a matching perception of the couple he is engaged with at the time.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think I can sit back and point at the OP and say "yes, he's a swinger" or "no, he's not" without enteracting with him on a sexual level, with the foreknowledge and consent of my honey. I tend to percieve whether someone is a swinger or not by how they handle dealing with both partners, whether it's simply being considerate enough to bring the absent partner a nice cigar as a way of saying thank you for the quality time with your spouse, or whether it's by taking an active part in playtime with both partners.

 

Text is such a difficult medium to convey meaning in, and I seriously doubt my ability to really get across what I mean, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that since I can't define the OP's "label", I'm not really sure how anyone else could, being as that there are so many different perceptions of what the label "swinger" means.

 

So, basically what I'm trying to convey to the OP is...

 

Congrats on all your self-searching, and self-education. Your attempts to find answers are commendable, and asking others in the lifestyle is definitely the best source for information that you'll find. However, take the wisdom that you find here and elsewhere, and use it to decide for yourself. It is what it is, and you are what you are.

 

Hope that helps clear it up, and thanks ya'll for not throwing soap at the hippy, I promise I'll be back to my old (non-existential, lol) "corporate whore" personna by the next post.

[yogee 15]

To me it's his understanding of all involved. There are single males (and even females) who want to swing and who do actually play with couples but I would not consider them SWINGERS for the simple reason of they lack the understanding of what is required on the part of the couples. They don't realize that yes these couples really do love each other and are committed to each other.

 

yes, most of them do not, nearly all of them don't realize this. I have met a man over here who is married but does swinging with another girl, not his wife, I was really surprised at this. I asked him if so called her GF knows any other single girl to whom I can date. He said you will not like such girls. I told him that I want a girl who can understand this lifestyle, later after seeing and each other, we can decide whether we want like each other's company or not. I said I will not promise s it depends what relationship we will develop. He said you then you should look for a characterless girl. I said W...H..A...T... . I said If I marry a girl, then it will out of my love for her and her love for me and everything else like kids and our professional lives are different and unrelated to swinging. But he did not agree and kept on saying words like "swinger women are characterless ". I never talked to him about this issue again but I talked with others and I have yet to find a man who understands swinging and women. When I try to make them understand that swinging is a lifestyle and couples in USA, China or other countries do this because they love and trust each other and want to be open in their lives about the problems then they say .. we don't want to do Ph.D. on this, if my wife is going to screw someone else then she must be characterless but majority of Indian men, almost more than 80% do sex outside of their married lives and then many of my friends ( who are among them) always keep me away from their wives, even when I never showed any wrong intentions. Someone told me, indirectly that they think I am very open and will make the girl characterless whomever I meet... I say .... .... why would I ? .. she is your wife man... not mine..

 

They think I talk about these things, so I must be dishonest in relationships. isn't there any one Indian single who understands this or even married ? Why they need to prove that Swingers are darn right about most men

 

 

They don't understand the boundaries that are in place or why they are there. These are often the same single males that are perfectly ok with being a third or with having sex with some other guys wife, but if you asked them if they would swing if they were in a committed relationship the answer would be "hell no, I respect my woman too much for that" or "hell no, I couldn't watch my woman with someone else". Again basically proving that they really don't get where the couples involved are coming from.

 

The difference is the attitude.

 

I agree, the difference is the fundamental way of thinking which shows itself in the attitude, which shows itself when men speak words out of their mouths. Unfortunately it is true for almost a very big majority of men... sigh..

[yogee 15]

SecretAsianMan, How do you define yourself in the lifestyle ?

 

What makes you different from a regular vanilla guy wanting to hook up ?

 

ok, I will take an opportunity to creep in here to explain my feelings

 

If you ask me to swing with a couple as 3some, then i will go with their choice and way of doing sex and if they prefer mine then I will like to have my first experience in the same room or a different nearby room. Now if you say husband is on the ground floor and me and his partner on the 10 floor, then I am sorry, i don't think I will enjoy it.

 

For me its the 2 person who are in fact 1 identity. That 1 identity attracts me towards itself, its the power of this magnetic attraction towards other all other 1 identities that I feel. I don't feel this with a girl alone. It is this husband-wife relationship that I look for, sex comes after that, sex is the second thing that happens, First thing that happens is their images as standing together and saying "we are married", thats what happens first with me and thst what the way I live..

 

sorry for the uninvited RANT

[NumbskullsX2 24]

And you can think it... but when you try to down other people for how they participate, that's where you go wrong. There's lots of fish in the proverbial sea... so play with couples and ignore singles. Good on you. But why, as SecretAsianMan points out, be so vehement in dissing singles, be they male or female? What did we ever do to you?

I guess I don't think of it as "participation" unless your doing this with somebody your in an emotional relationship with. The more committed your relationship, the more of a "swinger" you have to be to participate in this.

 

I'm not "dissing" singles, I just don't consider them swingers, that's all. In my mind, a swinger isn't a guy who has sex with another mans wife or girlfriend. It's a guy who lets other men have sex with his. Otherwise, what's the difference?

 

I think that calling singles who go to swing clubs "swingers" is like calling guys who pay air-guitar "musicians" or guys who play fantasy football "coaches"

[fun4Ds 1,098]

Y'know - I'm really not sure. I'm not even necessarily sure I *can* be defined as a "swinger" per se... but then again - is that really necessary to label myself as anything in particular? I'm "me" - whatever that entails.

 

I'm a single guy ... I have friends who are in the lifestyle and I've participated with them in swinging. I've been in relationships (boyfriend & girlfriend - never been married) where we have swung together.

 

I'm not really sure I'm all THAT different from "a regular guy wanting to hook up" (granted - I'd hesitate to use the term "vanilla" in a description of me & my particular sexual likes & dislikes - but that's a whole different episode of Oprah... *chuckling*)

 

I guess the difference for me is ... if my partner (girlfriend, whatever) would be open to the experience - I would gladly share this experience with her. And I would still love her and not judge her regardless of her desire (or lack thereof) to participate.

 

Thats a pretty Good answer you gave Mrsfun. Thanks for being honest. I can see your point of view.