Isn't Vanilla Hunting Bad?

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

I was writing a comment to a woman who was upset by the fact that she'd been approached, along with her husband, a number of times by vanilla hunting swingers. She had a very negative view of swingers, and I was defending the community in general without really addressing the vanilla hunting.

 

Some of the things I talked about included the ideas we all hold so dear: that you must be in a stable relationship and talk about things before you get into swinging. But it was at this point when I realized just how wrong vanilla hunting is; how it goes against everything we as a community say we value about the process of getting into the lifestyle. People on this board tend to bring up the importance of things like communication and making sure the both partners are comfortable before taking such a big step, even when it's not exactly relevant to the actual topic. We tell people here that you shouldn't rush into things and that you need to make sure you're both ready, etc.

 

So then why is it OK to go out, find a couple and thrust them into the lifestyle without all those important considerations? Why is OK to grab some random couple and put their relationship in jeopardy in order to gratify ourselves?

 

I don't think I've ever heard anyone speak out against vanilla hunting. We've never done it, but yet we never really thought about its consequence for a vanilla couple before either. I think people can be forgiven for not thinking it through, but after having given it some thought, it appears to be a wholly unacceptable practice.

 

I have to say the the woman I had been writing to had every right to be upset that someone would endanger her marriage for their own short-term sexual gratification.

 

What do you think? Is vanilla hunting wrong? If not, why not?

 

If this has been discussed in detail, please forgive me. I did a search, but since you can't search a multi-word term like "vanilla hunting" I ended up with a billion results for "vanilla," which is so common I might as well have been looking through the entire forum

[LikeMinds321 1,527]

 

I was writing a comment to a woman who was upset by the fact that she'd been approached, along with her husband, a number of times by vanilla hunting swingers...

Do you have more information on these approaches? Such as where did they occur, and how soon after meeting the couple did the swingers ask them for sex?

 

 

 

Great topic for discussion, btw, thanks.

 

LM

[exploringRM 305]

If we were to vanilla hunt I think we would look for the ones that are swingers but don't know it yet. We all were vanilla at some point and I bet many might have entered the l/s sooner if we were "hunted". If we were to hunt such prey we would take some time to see if there are any clues if the couple might be interested in playing.

 

But if a hunted couple needs convincing or is reluctant, then it should stop there. And that realization should occur well before the prey knew what was going on.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

If we were to vanilla hunt I think we would look for the ones that are swingers but don't know it yet. We all were vanilla at some point and I bet many might have entered the l/s sooner if we were "hunted". If we were to hunt such prey we would take some time to see if there are any clues if the couple might be interested in playing.

 

But if a hunted couple needs convincing or is reluctant, then it should stop there. And that realization should occur well before the prey knew what was going on.

 

But, is anyone really ready if they haven't talked about it? Sure, many couples would have entered into the lifestyle sooner if they'd been hunted, but how many would have had big fights the next morning because one of them did something that hurt the other?

 

How many people on this site would offered the advice: "don't think about, just hookup with the first couple you like!" Ready or or not, if they haven't talked about it, there's just too much danger that they're going to regret it. I don't think it's fair.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

Do you have more information on these approaches? Such as where did they occur, and how soon after meeting the couple did the swingers ask them for sex?

 

 

 

Great topic for discussion, btw, thanks.

 

LM

 

Honestly, both of the approaches seemed pretty clumsy. She only described two: one was a couple they met in a hotel bar, and the other had been friends for a couple of years.

 

Actually, the strangers weren't as clumsy as the friends. The strangers asked them up to their room and then the wife suggested that the woman writing the article have sex with her husband. Probably pretty typical vanilla hunting methods, I would guess.

 

The friends were pretty bad as she described it. The friends invited them over to play cards and had porn playing when they walked in. She says she went to the bathroom and went she come out the couple was already engaging in some oral. I think that would freak me out, to be honest.

 

She claims to have been approached seven times. If that's true, they must give off some swinger vibes. We were at a July 4th event back in Michigan and met a couple who worked with my mom. I remember thinking that the woman was a swinger. It was like she was at a lifestyles meeting and greet instead of a family picnic. It wasn't anything over the top, but it was obvious enough that Eve came up to me later and told me she thought they could be swingers. Who knows, but they could have been just really friendly vanillas.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

By the way, I think there are some circumstances where having sex with a vanilla couple is acceptable. Let's say you meet a vanilla couple and tell them you're swingers. If their reaction is one of curiosity, and they start talking to you about it and asking questions, and they talk to each other -- if it becomes very clear that the idea is a turn on and they seem really ready to try it -- no one is going to expect you to walk away from that. I still don't think it's in their best interest, but I understand it.

[exploringRM 305]

By the way, I think there are some circumstances where having sex with a vanilla couple is acceptable. Let's say you meet a vanilla couple and tell them you're swingers. If their reaction is one of curiosity, and they start talking to you about it and asking questions, and they talk to each other -- if it becomes very clear that the idea is a turn on and they seem really ready to try it -- no one is going to expect you to walk away from that. I still don't think it's in their best interest, but I understand it.

 

That's what I meant by a couple that are swingers but don't know it yet. Perhaps they've talked before. Perhaps have both had private thoughts about it. If things are out in the open and they are game...

 

And regarding couples regret the next day, how many posts are on here from newbie couples that had issues after their first experience.

 

I wasn't advocating trying to convert or coerce, just that if the opportunity presented itself and the other couple is truly game, then why not.

 

That being said, we have a hard enough time meeting a couple "cold" at a swing club much less a vanilla bar/vanilla couple.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

That's what I meant by a couple that are swingers but don't know it yet. Perhaps they've talked before. Perhaps have both had private thoughts about it. If things are out in the open and they are game...

 

And regarding couples regret the next day, how many posts are on here from newbie couples that had issues after their first experience.

 

I wasn't advocating trying to convert or coerce, just that if the opportunity presented itself and the other couple is truly game, then why not.

 

That being said, we have a hard enough time meeting a couple "cold" at a swing club much less a vanilla bar/vanilla couple.

 

I understand what you're saying, it's just that I think it's a pretty thin line that's easy to cross, to the possible detriment of the vanilla couple.

 

And I'm not trying to say that vanilla hunters are bad people. I'm against sleeping with a cheater, but I'm positive that if she's hot enough I'd forget all about my concerns for her husband. Sex does that to you. But, after thinking about this from a new perspective, I think I have to say I'm against it and would generally speak out against the practice on the grounds that it's unfair to the vanilla couple and their relationship. At the same time I can't say I'd walk away from a really hot couple that's just become fascinated with our lifestyle.

[slevin 1,374]

But, is anyone really ready if they haven't talked about it? Sure, many couples would have entered into the lifestyle sooner if they'd been hunted, but how many would have had big fights the next morning because one of them did something that hurt the other?

 

How many people on this site would offered the advice: "don't think about, just hookup with the first couple you like!" Ready or or not, if they haven't talked about it, there's just too much danger that they're going to regret it. I don't think it's fair.

 

Why is it up to me to make sure that they have approached this in the proper way or not? It is their relationship, not ours. We make sure that we are good, we evaluate the situations to make sure we are comfortable, but the other couple has to do that for themselves. It isn't our responsibility.

 

I don't see anything wrong with approaching a vanilla couple and escalating to sex. They'd be making the decision to follow through with that. If they asked us questions and advice etc. then we'd be happy to offer up what we consider to be wisdom. If they are happy to "go with the flow" then we'd be ok with that.

 

We don't approach vanilla couples though, but we don't see anything wrong with it.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

Why is it up to me to make sure that they have approached this in the proper way or not? It is their relationship, not ours. We make sure that we are good, we evaluate the situations to make sure we are comfortable, but the other couple has to do that for themselves. It isn't our responsibility.

 

I don't see anything wrong with approaching a vanilla couple and escalating to sex. They'd be making the decision to follow through with that. If they asked us questions and advice etc. then we'd be happy to offer up what we consider to be wisdom. If they are happy to "go with the flow" then we'd be ok with that.

 

We don't approach vanilla couples though, but we don't see anything wrong with it.

 

OK, so you don't care if you ruin a couple's marriage. Fine. My point was that most people here will say you shouldn't swing until you've worked out the details. If you're one of these, and you go vanilla hunting, you're not being consistent in your lifestyles values.

 

Of course, to suggest that they should have prepared for your advances in advance of you advancing is just a cope out that allows you to feel better about not taking responsibility for the damage you visit upon an unsuspecting couple while you satisfy your sexual urges at their expense, but that's a whole other issue for another thread.

[DocWill 83]

In our experience (which isn’t so vast) we seem to notice that some of our vanilla friends have actually hunted us. I know… crazy, right? Mrs. Will and I have always been pretty sexual… and we’ve made no bones about how much we like to have sex with each other in the company of close friends. No, we’re not trashy, we don’t talk about our LS adventures, and no, we don’t have ANY kind of sex in front of vanilla couples or singles… but yet we both seem to give off this vibe that we’re open to sexual adventures. Mrs. Will has been approached by several of our single female vanilla friends over the past 10 years for anything from joining a husband and wife threesome (2X) or just girl on girl (5X), to straight out wanting to get it on with both of us (3X). Mrs. Will suffers from what I like to call the “girl’s girl” façade- where women who are bi-curious somehow think she’ll make the perfect experiment. I’ve tried not to read into this and just concluded that it was because Mrs. Will is VERY demure, very good looking, and knows how to act like a lady even when she’s feeling very sensuous. I, on the other hand, have been approached no less than 7 or 8 times to be one of the M’s in a MFM with vanilla married couples. Mrs. Will says it’s because I’m not threatening, also attractive, and somewhat mysterious. The kicker is, rarely anyone ever goes after us for one-on-one sex (well, it’s happened, but nowhere near the number of times we’ve been “seduced” by vanilla couples or singles). We both think that has to do with a rule we had long before we started swing- which was/is: bars, clubs, girl/guy nights out are not an option unless we go together. That may seem like a silly rule- especially in a relationship where having sex with other people is something we’re both okay with, but it works for us- and I believe it makes us appear solid as a couple rather than just one part of a couple who is “away to play.” That’s another post all together though because I digress.

 

Anyway, being that we both really like to analyze people and situations to the extreme, we’ve come to the conclusion that we, as an open, sexually charged, secure, confident, successful, couple, seem to be the best “option” for people who want to explore their kink- and as a result, have found ourselves in positions where weaker couples would have just jumped into bed and let the chips fall where they may. The only time we ever gave in was to one vanilla couple that had known for years. The wife in that situation instigated it (again, so the “girls” could do a little of “this” and a little of “that”) and we all ended up in bed together. The next few days were rough because the same wife that wanted it actually ended up regretting it. However, about a month later, and after A LOT of communication, we’ve now found ourselves (all four of us) engaged in some pretty hot sessions. So yes, we were hunted and seduced by a vanilla couple and we gave in without much thought. Had it been different, had the other wife not had an “Ah Ha” moment about her own sexuality, things could have been messy.

 

So, to answer the OP- we don’t hunt anyone unless we’re in the mood for a MFM or FMF where the third is single, professional, and attractive (and that happens a lot when we go out together because Mrs. Will gets hit on non-stop, by both sexes, even when I just get up to go to the bathroom). Couples are simply off limits unless they’ve said that they have had some good experiences and all four of us feel the itch- which will probably never happen. Although- the four of us believe that one of our own neighbors is starting to take notice… and she (of course) has started asking “those” kinds of questions to see where Mrs. Will and I’s “freak level” is at. Don’t worry, we’ll down play it like we always do… but damn, is it possible for THREE couples to get all mixed up in this? I don’t even want to think about it (yes I do).

 

If we want to play, we know with who and where to go to do it. Vanillas are often a fledgling swinger’s first experience because of the comfort level- at least that’s what we’ve been able to take away from this site anyway. What’s unknown is who is starting the ball rolling towards sex.

 

So to end (because I just got off a 26hr shift and I’m very loopy), I think both vanilla and those of us in the LS are guilty of “hunting.” I liken it to being a 15 year-old boy and going after the class slut for sexual exploration- he knows he can get some if he plays his cards right. That’s us… that’s how we appear to vanilla couples- as the “sure things” that can help them explore. Yes, THAT is dangerous, but I still think hunting for vanilla couples is worse.

 

Damn, I start typing and can’t stop. Sorry for the long read, just wanted to put our $0.02 in.

[socolais 696]

We haven't converted a vanilla couple yet, so my thoughts on this are just that - thoughts. I think vanilla hunters have a responsibility to their prey and that responsibility takes the form of respect for their relationship just as the hunter couple have respect for each other. We've known couples that pursue the "fresh meat" and describe a really fun excitement leading the vanilla couple into their first exciting swing encounter. The hunting and conversion can be done well, or it can be done poorly and when it's done poorly somebody gets hurt and this game gets a bad reputation. I do know that swinging with good hunters is a fun thing to do and I think that's because they have a well honed intuition and respect for others is as natural as breathing.

 

The whole concept of swinging is based on "using" another couple for our benefit. And they, likewise "use" us. When the benefits balance, everyone goes home happy. When someone gets much more than they give, someone most likely feels abused.

[sexcupid 809]

OK, so you don't care if you ruin a couple's marriage. Fine. My point was that most people here will say you shouldn't swing until you've worked out the details. If you're one of these, and you go vanilla hunting, you're not being consistent in your lifestyles values.

 

Of course, to suggest that they should have prepared for your advances in advance of you advancing is just a cope out that allows you to feel better about not taking responsibility for the damage you visit upon an unsuspecting couple while you satisfy your sexual urges at their expense, but that's a whole other issue for another thread.

 

That was a bit harsh...so maybe you should actually read what slevin wrote. They stated that they do not approach vanilla couples, but do not have a problem with swingers who do.

 

When slevin said: "Why is it up to me to make sure that they have approached this in the proper way or not? It is their relationship, not ours. We make sure that we are good, we evaluate the situations to make sure we are comfortable, but the other couple has to do that for themselves. It isn't our responsibility."

 

Basically what I think they were getting at with that statement is that if a couple (vanilla or swinger) finds themselves in a situation...it is not up to me to police them...if they are majorly flirty and we all end up in a pile at someone's house they made that choice to participate...they weren't forced by the immoral swingers to have sex with them. Its called taking responsibility for your actions. My sweetie and I can only make sure we are cool with each other...the other couple is responsible for making sure they are cool with what's happening and if they aren't to call a halt to activities.

 

And I believe the term you were looking for is "cop out" to "cope" with what you are doing. Sorry...my inner grammar picker won't be quiet tonight.

 

We have hung out with some very uptight "swingers" and some very permissive "vanillas"...so while we've never tried to pick up someone from a vanilla establishment, I can see how it happens and is (or is not) successful.

[Playful1 434]

I dont agree with it or "get it" but that is mostly because I tend to see, from my experience, that people who like "vanilla hunting" are the ones who want to be the most 'out there" or wild couple/people in the room. They want to show how open minded and out there they are (or at least want to feel that way) and most of them, if put in a room with what I consider and know as swingers, would be the total opposite.

 

if that is your thing, fine, but I generally don't have a good opinion of it. Just go find what you are looking for within the swinging community. It has gotten wide/open enough that i am sure you can find something/someone that fits without going after vanilla folks.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

That was a bit harsh...

 

Yeah, it was harsh, but not too harsh. The suggestion that couples are supposed to be prepared for a swinger couple to come on to them and have thought through the consequences of their actions is absurd at face value. It's also callous. "I don't care if we ruin your marriage, you should have thought about that before you gave in to temptation. Of course, we tempted you, but you should talked about this long ago!" It's complete BS.

 

"Why is it up to me to make sure that they have approached this in the proper way or not?

 

They didn't approach anyone. In this fictional scenario, Slevin approach them. But they were supposed to have made sure they were prepared for Slevin's advances so that they didn't ruin their marriage? That's idiotic. Are you prepared for your husband to walk in the door in a dress and say that he wants a sex change? I hope you are, otherwise if you don't handle it well it's your fault for not approaching it in the proper way! Stupid, right? Right!

 

By the way, if you're going to throw out the grammar crap you should make sure your own house is in order. Your use of the ellipsis is totally out of control. The very phrase, "Sorry...my inner grammar picker won't be quiet tonight" is a shambles. You would use a comma there, never an ellipsis. Your use of an ellipsis instead of em dashes is also wrong. Also, by putting "swingers" and "vanillas" in quotes you are suggesting that they aren't really swingers or vanillas. Trust me, you don't want to correct me on grammar. I may not be the world's foremost authority, but you're not even close to being in my league. I make the occasional typo (many, actually), but I can see that I have a much better grasp on the rules of the English language than you do. For example, you need a comma after "basically" in the third paragraph. Another would be correct after "house." I literally could go on.

 

EDIT: Now to be honest, that was a little harsh. Sorry, it's just that this whole "vanillas beware" attitude kind of pisses me off. And it disappoints me. I'd like to think we're better than that -- we're not animals who can't control ourselves. And we all know that when it comes to sex and alcohol humans don't always make the right decisions. But hey, if it takes preying on the weak to get laid, I suppose that's the tack some would take.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

In our experience (which isn’t so vast) we seem to notice that some of our vanilla friends have actually hunted us. I know… crazy, right?

 

Wow. That must be some vibe you're putting out. Eve had some of that going on before we met. Bi-girls seemed to love her and she was asked to be the third in a three-way many times. She never did it. Oddly, it hasn't happened since we started swinging.

 

To your last point: I think to some extent we're all hunters. It can't be helped to some degree.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

I dont agree with it or "get it" but that is mostly because I tend to see, from my experience, that people who like "vanilla hunting" are the ones who want to be the most 'out there" or wild couple/people in the room. They want to show how open minded and out there they are (or at least want to feel that way) and most of them, if put in a room with what I consider and know as swingers, would be the total opposite.

 

if that is your thing, fine, but I generally don't have a good opinion of it. Just go find what you are looking for within the swinging community. It has gotten wide/open enough that i am sure you can find something/someone that fits without going after vanilla folks.

 

I only know of one case of vanilla hunting, so I'm not really sure who does it. However, I could see that being the case. It would be nice to actually hear from some hunters though. So far it's been all us non-hunters espousing our feelings on the issue. I'd like to hear someone's experiences with hunting and how it's gone. Perhaps I'm completely off-base and most couples don't have any more regrets than those of us who talked about it ad nauseam.

 

I think you're completely correct: in most areas (even Reno, a somewhat small town) the community is big enough to find what you want within it. I suspect it's the thrill of the chase that gets them; after all, it's easy to catch swingers. At least, we're easy to catch.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

I think vanilla hunters have a responsibility to their prey and that responsibility takes the form of respect for their relationship just as the hunter couple have respect for each other.

 

The whole concept of swinging is based on "using" another couple for our benefit. And they, likewise "use" us. When the benefits balance, everyone goes home happy. When someone gets much more than they give, someone most likely feels abused.

 

Very well said. That's what upset me about Slevin's response. It lacks respect for the vanillas. Otherwise you're just using people. That's bad. Sure, you can say it's on them, but that's blaming the victim. The victim you've victimized. I thought we were better than that as a community. I'm saddened to see that some people can be such blatant users, but I suppose you're going to find good and bad people in the lifestyle just as you would in the greater world.

[PB&J 1,086]

but I can see that I have a much better grasp on the rules of the English language than you do.

 

Actually, that should be "grasp of". I could go on, too, but won't.

[The Fuse 1,012]

I think when it comes down to it, I would like to abide by the Golden Rule. If we were unprepared for a tempting situation like swinging, how would we like to be treated? Would we like to be seduced and drawn in, with the idea that we're grownups and able to make our own decisions, or introduced to the idea and left to be the ones to make the move? Or introduced to the idea and then told "We think you should be really careful, take your time, and talk about it together"?

 

Any of these positions is at least somewhat defensible. But if it were me that were presented with a completely new, unfamiliar, "outside the box" but titillating opportunity, that temptation might get the better of someone who wasn't prepared for it. Then the question becomes, do you care? Do you care about the impacts you have on others who might not be prepared, or do you take the attitude of "everyone's responsible for themselves"? I mean, technically everyone IS responsible for themselves. But we can be considerate of others, and we take pride in having that consideration.

 

Okay, go ahead, pick apart my grammar .

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

Actually, that should be "grasp of". I could go on, too, but won't.

 

No, please go on. I would like to see you pick out 10 or more errors in any one of my posts. Remember, I didn't start this grammar bashing; I was the victim of it. If someone is going to attack me for a typo, and tell me I have bad grammar, they shouldn't have 10+ errors in the very message they've written in order to chastise me. So please, go on.

 

And no, it's not "grasp of" any more than it's "grasp on." You can take a "grasp of" something or you can have a "grasp on" something. You're mistaking a saying for a grammar rule, and hackneyed sayings are not rules. I would like to see the grammar book that lists "grasp of" as a rule. LOL!

 

But in any case, none of us are perfect. That's exactly why I don't attack people for bad grammar. You must be a friend of hers since you're attacking me for defending myself. Why aren't you attacking her for the original offense? Hmm?

 

All I can say is that you must be out of ideas if you have to start making this about grammar rather than address the more difficult subject of the original post. I know it's not easy being honest with yourself, but I have a lot more respect for someone who can say it's not in the vanilla couple's best interest but that they're going to continue the practice. But let's talk about grammar instead. It's a lot easier. Especially when you start to make up your own rules! LOL!

[BiloxiCouple 695]

Please, play nice people. This is suppose to be fun.

 

Try living down here. There are more important things in life.

 

Boudreaux & the Devil

 

 

Boudreaux died and was on his way down to Hell. In anticipation, the Devil turned up the thermostat to make it extra warm for Boudreaux. When Boudreaux arrived, the Devil asked, "Hey Boudreaux, how do you like the heat down here?"

Boudreaux says, "Mais, it's just fine. It reminds me of Bayou PonPon in July."

 

That made the Devil mad. That night, he turned the thermostat up all the way it could go. Man it was hot! When Boudreaux woke up, the Devil asked him, "NOW how do you like it down here?"

 

Boudreaux says, "Mais, it's fine. It reminds me of August on Bayou Lafourche."

 

As you might expect, that made the Devil all the more mad. Well, that night, he turned the thermostat down all the way it could go! The whole place frosted over. Icicles started forming from the rafters. When Boudreaux woke up, the Devil asked him, "How you like it NOW, Boudreaux?"

 

Boudreaux, shivering, through blue lips, says, "Mais cher, I'm one happy Cajun!"

 

The Devil was infuriated! He yelled, "What do you mean you're one happy Cajun?!!"

 

Boudreaux, still shivering says, "The Saints done won the Superbowl!"

[LikeMinds321 1,527]

 

I was writing a comment to a woman who was upset by the fact that she'd been approached, along with her husband, a number of times by vanilla hunting swingers. She had a very negative view of swingers, and I was defending the community in general without really addressing the vanilla hunting.

 

 

...The strangers asked them up to their room and then the wife suggested that the woman writing the article have sex with her husband...

It sounds like this thread was prompted by an article you read on the Internet. Is this correct?

 

If so, would it be possible for you to provide a link to the article?

 

LM

[slevin 1,374]

OK, so you don't care if you ruin a couple's marriage. Fine. My point was that most people here will say you shouldn't swing until you've worked out the details. If you're one of these, and you go vanilla hunting, you're not being consistent in your lifestyles values.

 

Of course, to suggest that they should have prepared for your advances in advance of you advancing is just a cope out that allows you to feel better about not taking responsibility for the damage you visit upon an unsuspecting couple while you satisfy your sexual urges at their expense, but that's a whole other issue for another thread.

 

You are using fallacies to attack my actual point. I never said I was ok with ruining someone elses marriage and I never said they should have been prepared for someones advances. Stick to the point.

 

My point was that I can not know what they did or didn't do. I can't know whether our advance is going to hurt their marriage or not. Perhaps they've discussed it before, perhaps they never have but this will be a great thing for them. /We/ can't know that; why should that paralyze us from approaching someone. It isn't like approaching them seeking some sexual fun is going to force them into it. They are making their own decisions. Even if their marriage is hurt, it isn't our advance that caused that. Their own decisions resulted in the outcome; good or bad.

 

I don't see the contradiction.

[slevin 1,374]

I think when it comes down to it, I would like to abide by the Golden Rule. If we were unprepared for a tempting situation like swinging, how would we like to be treated? Would we like to be seduced and drawn in, with the idea that we're grownups and able to make our own decisions, or introduced to the idea and left to be the ones to make the move? Or introduced to the idea and then told "We think you should be really careful, take your time, and talk about it together"?

 

Any of these positions is at least somewhat defensible. But if it were me that were presented with a completely new, unfamiliar, "outside the box" but titillating opportunity, that temptation might get the better of someone who wasn't prepared for it. Then the question becomes, do you care? Do you care about the impacts you have on others who might not be prepared, or do you take the attitude of "everyone's responsible for themselves"? I mean, technically everyone IS responsible for themselves. But we can be considerate of others, and we take pride in having that consideration.

 

Okay, go ahead, pick apart my grammar .

 

As usual, a very good take on the subject

 

I think there is a middle ground to the whole concept; you can be respectful and considerate of others while still approaching vanilla couples and escalating through to sex. This takes an ability to read the situation and roll with the sub-communication rather than overt communication. Not all situations will lend themselves to that of course. If you approach and they are flirty and receptive, then why stop to have the conversation? Advance along and read the situation; if you get to a point where you're concerned then stop and discuss it.

 

If they are comfortable all the way along, then why is it on my shoulders to make sure they are in a good place? Who made me the swinging gatekeeper? In any case, for us this is purely an academic discussion since we've never actually done it.

[Adam-n-Eve 223]

I think when it comes down to it, I would like to abide by the Golden Rule.

 

I think we forget about the Golden Rule. We like to espouse things like "personal responsibility" instead. I think the Golden Rule is a fairly good standard to use here.

 

I whole-heartedly agree that people need to take responsibility for their own actions, but we're talking about a case where someone is intruding upon this couple's life and insinuating themselves into it. At that point, it's not about personal responsibility so much as power. The swingers have more power and more control because they're moving in a world they understand, whereas the vanilla couple is off-balance and out of their area of experience. The vanillas are obviously not in as strong a position as the swingers; but yet, they're supposed to act and react as though they fully understand all the consequence. But, why would they? If a couple has never thought about swinging, why would they have thought about the consequences?

 

I manage an IT department. I hear IT people make snide comments about professional individuals who don't understand computers as well as they do. These individuals may be lawyers who spend all their time studying law, but they're also supposed to know computers as well as some IT guy who lives, eats, and breathes technology. It's idiocy. And, it gives IT people a bad reputation. The public thinks IT workers are jerks. Most people would ask that these IT workers use the Golden Rule. When the IT worker goes to a lawyer, should the lawyer make fun of him for not knowing all the ins and outs of the law? I'll bet the IT worker would say "no." So should he make fun of lawyers who don't know computers? No.

 

I see a correlation here. Why are people expecting some vanilla couple to understand swinging and all its possible pitfalls just because they know it? Again, I think it's idiocy. And if we act this way, people are going to think swingers are jerks. Personally, I don't want that.

 

OK, there are grammar errors in this message. For one, the final pronoun "they" in the first sentence of the third paragraph is unclear. Is it talking about IT workers or the professional individuals? I think it's clear enough that it's the professionals, and since rewriting it without the pronouns makes it a rather clunky sentence, I've left it in. Still, it's wrong. However, I promise not to attack your grammar if you don't attack mine. That's not just for this thread; it's a promise I make to all of you for all time. The only exception I make is when someone uses absolutely no punctuation or the grammar is so bad I can't make out what the author intended. At that point, it's about being able to understand the message, not about attacking the author. So, can we drop the grammar stupidity now?

[WildMiCouple 325]

We were at a July 4th event back in Michigan and met a couple who worked with my mom. I remember thinking that the woman was a swinger. It was like she was at a lifestyles meeting and greet instead of a family picnic. It wasn't anything over the top, but it was obvious enough that Eve came up to me later and told me she thought they could be swingers. Who knows, but they could have been just really friendly vanillas.

You had me thinking about where we were at over the 4th of July Tammy could easily be that woman. She's very friendly, outgoing, and does the touching thing when speaking with others. And we're not afraid to talk about our sex life (the monogomous one) with others. So, although we've never approached or hunted vanillas, I can understand how others may think we're swingers. The few times our vanilla friends/acquantainces have asked, I've responded with "Why in the world would you think that?"

 

Now back to your initial question- approaching vanilla couples. We wouldn't be comfy with it due to the drama you are inviting into your playtime. The odds are stacked against you that they'll even accept your offer. Then you would have to wonder if the jealousy devil will show his ugly face during the playing. With all the different ways to find other swingers to hookup with, why would anyone specifically hunt vanilla couples Just sounds like a recipe for disaster.

 

Brett

[slevin 1,374]

- You started with a suggestive and leading topic "Isn't Vanilla hunting bad?"

- Followed up by setting up the argument to be either you agree or you're an immoral ass (my phrasing taking some liberty)

- Rather than actually having a discussion you attacked me with fallacious comments for disagreeing with your assertion

- You followed that up with attacking comments to those dissenting views with rather inflammatory words and phrases

 

What happened to having an actual discussion?

[Alura 2,774]

If it hadn't been for "vanilla couples" we'd likely have never played. I wouldn't say we "hunted" them but when we sensed an interest by a couple that we thought would be fun we didn't let the opportunity to talk about it slide by.

 

Alura

[oc1234 435]

And if it hadn't been for "vanilla hunters", my wife and I would never have started playing.

[ClosetSwinger 112]

We have not gone vanilla hunting and I can't imagine we would. Just seems like it would cause a lot of drama. We make it a point to NOT play with vanilla friends. That's how this whole thing started and we are no longer friends with said couple (although we and they are both still swinging but NOT with each other, that blew up like a shaken up soda...). In our defense we nor they planned to play together, it just happened one night when everyone had to much to drink. We enjoy swinging just not with them.

 

Since we became swingers a few of my CLOSE friends know. One of which is a single female and she did dabble in the lifestyle for a short period after she found out. We did VERY tame things with her but I would not let it go any further than it did for fear it would cause issues later on down the road. She got out of the lifestyle for reasons unrelated to us and we are still very close, I believe our decision NOT to full or even soft swap with her is why.

[Coupleerotic22 1,419]

I whole-heartedly agree that people need to take responsibility for their own actions, but we're talking about a case where someone is intruding upon this couple's life and insinuating themselves into it. At that point, it's not about personal responsibility so much as power. The swingers have more power and more control because they're moving in a world they understand, whereas the vanilla couple is off-balance and out of their area of experience. The vanillas are obviously not in as strong a position as the swingers; but yet, they're supposed to act and react as though they fully understand all the consequence. But, why would they? If a couple has never thought about swinging, why would they have thought about the consequences?

 

But they were supposed to have made sure they were prepared for Slevin's advances so that they didn't ruin their marriage? That's idiotic. Are you prepared for your husband to walk in the door in a dress and say that he wants a sex change? I hope you are, otherwise if you don't handle it well it's your fault for not approaching it in the proper way! Stupid, right? Right!

+

 

You have a very low opinion of what a married couple is capable of handling. Before we were swingers, we were vanilla. Being hit on was something both my wife and I experienced. It was not some mystical conundrum that we were unprepared to handle, even the first time. A simple no thanks worked almost every time. If they persisted, it became no. We did not need experience in the lifestyle to tell us it was not for us (at the time). Believe it or not, there are some pretty smart and stable vanillas out there that can handle a proposition from a swinger without caving to the floor in an uncontrolled submission. Unless there is some secret swinger power that no one has told me about, it is just people asking people for sex.

 

As for ruining someones life. If someone ask me to do something, like swing, cheat, drugs, or skydive, and I go along with it, and it ruins my life, who is responsible? Me, plain and simple. I made a choice, with or without thinking of the consequences. If I did not consider the consequences then it would be stupid on my part, not the party that asked me, not matter how persuasive they were. Well, maybe I need to exclude Slevin, I hear he has to twirly eyes, like Kaa, that make you do things you don't really want too, so that's not fair.

 

Do you really think that a couple that had NEVER considered swinging would buckle at the mention of joining in a foursome and jump into the sack? Only to realize the next morning something they did the night before but had NEVER considered of or discussed ruined their marriage? Sounds more like a bad movie plot than reality.

 

If you want to throw other circumstances such as alcohol, cheating spouse, taking advantage of what you know to be a bad marriage, sure then approaching them would be crossing a line. But to approach an otherwise normal vanilla couple seems not much different than swinging with a newbie couple at their first social. Sure the vanilla couple is not at a social, but if they take you up on the offer, then it is not an idea that is new to them or at least not one they are incapable of understanding. If it hurts their relationship, of course I would have some guilt, just as I would with a newbie couple or for that matter a veteran couple.

 

As for your Lawyer/IT scenario. First, if someone is speaking over my head I ask them to break it down in plain English for me. But it is not like having sex with others really needs to be explained, and if it does, there are much more pressing issues beyond them being vanilla.

 

As for the lady you post about. It sounds like she is just irritated that she keeps getting approached, she has an issue with people in the lifestyle and she is voicing her outrage that we even exist or perhaps "the lady doth protest too much" and she secretly wants to give it a go. On the other hand if she took someone up on a proposition with zero thought and let it ruin her marriage, then all I can hear is Dan Aykroyd famous words from his SNL "Counterpoint" skit, "Jane, you ignorant slut"

 

And finally, I know I am inviting heat here, but you response have been snippy on this grammar issue. Yes, someone pointed out your type/grammar error. Ignore it, thank them, or whatever, but don't escalate it. Which is exactly what you did when you proclaimed "Trust me, you don't want to correct me on grammar. I may not be the world's foremost authority, but you're not even close to being in my league." That was arrogant and you have been rightfully blasted for it. It become particularly worse, because I, someone who is horrible at grammar and spelling, have noticed other mistakes in your post. You have no idea who is on the other side of a post. It could be a Harvard English professor, a NYT editor or a best selling author. Do yourself and the rest of us a favor and tone down the rhetoric.

[Alura 2,774]

Tone it down, Folks. It's not necessary to insult people and will not be tolerated on this board. Years ago this was a common problem. The oldsters still here have worked hard to make this the friendliest board around. Those who refused to work on the improvements with us no longer post here.

 

I know many internet discussion boards revel in cute insults but not here. It's not acceptable to insult people and unfriendly (at best) to correct grammar, so let's make up (kissing not necessary) and get with the spirit of the Swingers Board: Friendly, courteous discussions.

 

Alura

[Coupleerotic22 1,419]

Tone it down, Folks. It's not necessary to insult people and will not be tolerated on this board. Years ago this was a common problem. The oldsters still here have worked hard to make this the friendliest board around. Those who refused to work on the improvements with us no longer post here.

 

I know many internet discussion boards revel in cute insults but not here. It's not acceptable to insult people and unfriendly (at best) to correct grammar, so let's make up (kissing not necessary) and get with the spirit of the Swingers Board: Friendly, courteous discussions.

 

Alura

You are correct. I should have left the last paragraph out. I apologize to the board. In fact as irritated as I was I should have just moved on to the next thread.

[interestedinif 16]

It's funny this subject would come up so recently...

 

I was getting ice cream at our local ice cream place with my kids and a hot couple walked in just as I was paying. I didn't pick up on any "swinger" vibes or anything, but they seemed very secure and were talking and chatting and having a good time together. It was then that I realized how cool it would be to have a "card" I could hand them that just had our email address on it. So today I went and bought some blank business cards and just put "Email us at xxx@xxx.com" with a simple little "swinger" type graphic (no wording of the sort). The idea being if they aren't swingers, they will just throw it away. If they ARE, maybe we'll get an email.

 

The problem in our area is the complete lack of places to go and meet people (at all). The bars are all really rough crowds, and the dance places are all 20 something's looking to hook-up with other 20 something's. There is nothing in between... and the closest clubs are 200+ miles away.

 

So, my point being, because we are so heavily Mormon in this area (55%), there really isn't a way to KNOW if someone is a swinger... so, now I have a business card I can give out and see what happens.

 

We have met many very nice, fun swinger couples in our local area from web sites and such, but I know for a fact there is an entire swinger community that does not do anything online... and there's always the hot couple at the ice cream place that would be worth meeting...

 

So, I'm not sure this is vanilla "hunting" as much as trying to be a little more forward, without "outing" ourselves.

[fun4Ds 1,098]

Now you got me thinking about Ice cream......

 

Just to add our two cents. We stopped at a little convince store while traveling through a state park earlier this year. Turns out its historic... Mrsfun is looking at some pictures around the walls and I'm at the bar by myself (its a vanilla bar, Ice-cream, rustic)

 

Now I got my eye on a double scoop of "pecan cream" and obviously the attention of the female owner. She makes conversation and asks if we are looking for the local nudists (thats how she started out) swingers club of all things. She straight out asked me...... Lets just say that ice cream got real good, as well as the conversation at that point. Mrsfun joined in as well as her husband after a little while.

 

Were glad they took a chance..... We must have been having a good hair day, lol

 

Your asking me "Isn't Vanilla Hunting Bad?"

 

Well no, its not... as you can see why. Its been GOOD !!!

 

 

fun4ds

[BiloxiCouple 695]

Don't some swinger couples try to go hunting for single "vanilla" men? Wouldn't this be hunting too?

[Guest rdy46227]

So are there any real evangelists among us?

 

I'm thinking of people who are missionaries for the lifestyle. They may not be out on the street corners preaching, but maybe they are witnessing to people they think might be interested...

[Coupleerotic22 1,419]

We have met or seen a number of people we would love to approach. But we have not and unless there are some unique circumstances, won't.

 

Our privacy and discretion are paramount to us. So we are not going to take the chance of outing ourselves to complete strangers, no matter how sexy and hot. At socials or swinger sites we know they have an interest in the lifestyle.

[Coupleerotic22 1,419]

I had another thought. This thread has been focused on vanilla couples.

 

Reading another current thread on hiring escorts (and successive previous thread links) as well as remembering a few post on Unicorns, including one of my own. It got me to thinking, that many times on this board it has been recommended to look for SF in the vanilla world.

 

As it has been pointed out SF can get all the action they desire without coming to the LS, that is one reason given for why they are so elusive.

 

One perspective in this thread has focused on the detriment to a couples stable relationship because of "vanilla hunters". But a SF looking to have some fun, may not be in a situation that would be an issue. She is single after all, so SO communications and relationship issues are not part of the context.

 

Does the OP have issues with "hunting" vanilla SF's?