I ALLOW my wife to have sex with other men.

[Chicup 41]

There I said it.

 

I see there seems to be some forum angst over using this sort of language (or the term share my wife) in a few posts lately.

 

This denotes ownership and I fully claim it. We are a married couple, we made promises to each other, and in those promises was the idea that our sexuality was now tied together. As long as it is tied together any sex she has outside of our relationship is truly allowed by me. I can revoke it at any time. If she chooses to ignore this and goes a head with it anyways she is in breach of those promises we made and it would be grounds for dissolving our relationship.

 

You can say we are joined, bonded, intertwined or any other more romantic but less pejorative term but it doesn't change it, I OWN her ass and I decide who gets to touch it as long as she wishes to be with me.

 

This does not mean I can force her to have relations with other people, but it does mean I have a say in who those other people are. If they make me uncomfortable in any way I can pull the plug and she will just have to live with it.

 

As should be obvious but I think I'll need to state this goes BOTH ways. She ALLOWS me. If she pulls the plug on a couple, thats it, I don't get to have sex with that other woman ever again. If they make her uncomfortable in any way, well I'll just have to live with it. If I choose to ignore that, she has grounds to permanently terminate our relationship.

 

We are NOT just people living together and raising kids together, who are free to go their own way without responsibility to each other. To be poetic we are now of one body, and WE must both decide how those bodies get used and if they get used. We must both agree or there is no more argument.

[JustAskJulie 2,595]

As much as it pains me to say it.... I feel the same way. My husband doesn't OWN me but he does have a say in what / who I do. This goes beyond sex for us. We respect each other so we allow the other to have a say in what we do. He shares me and I share him and we enjoy it. I allow him to enjoy whomever he wants (as long as there's not some good reason for me to say no), and he allows me to play with others as he is comfortable.

 

I do feel like we got tied up a lot around here in semantics, getting caught on one word or phrase instead of taking in the whole feeling of a post or issue. Instead of asking questions to clarify a situation we jump to conclusions sometimes. This definitely scares away some people and that's just sad, especially when those people are new to this site and often new to swinging. It's not a feeling we should be putting out there. I would hope we are here to help others and not just to sound smarter than someone else or to hear ourselves talk.

[km34 672]

In our relationship, I have no right to TELL him he can't do something. I can ask him not to do it, tell him why I'm uncomfortable with it, and tell him what my reaction will be if he chooses to go against my wishes, but the choice is ultimately up to him. An example conversation could go something like this:

 

Hubby: I really wanna shtup this woman I work with!

Me: I really wish you wouldn't.

Hubby: Why? She's hot!

Me: Because I don't think getting involved with people you work with is a good idea. I've also met this woman and she is NOT someone I feel is trustworthy. I've heard story after story of her drama-playing at work, I've seen her newsfeed on facebook and know she's crazy in her personal life, and I just don't want to have to deal with that.

Hubby: Fair enough, but I might just have to do it anyway.

Me: Okay, but be warned. If you do shtup this woman, I will NOT be pleased. I will probably sleep in the guest room for a while, I will NOT be letting you touch me other than a hug and a quick kiss now and then, and I will just in general not be happy until the situation is over. I'll get over it, but be prepared for stressed out/unhappy wife for a while.

 

Then he can make his decision. I told him how I felt, I told him the consequences within our relationship, but ultimately it's up to him. Sure, it may seem like I threatened him, but really if he was going to shtup someone I don't trust, I wouldn't want to have intercourse until I knew he was 1 - clear of any STDs and 2 - didn't knock her up. This has never had to happen since we are both generally good judges of character, but it COULD. lol

 

I don't own hubby, nor does he own me. We (well, I, since I wrote them) made sure our vows were free from any terminology that called our union anything but voluntary and a pact between two individuals. We said nothing about exclusivity, we said nothing about sexual fidelity, we said nothing close to "til death do we part." On purpose. We agreed to bind ourselves together (literally - we did a handfasting ), but we did not agree to give up any part of ourselves. We agreed to respect one another and to consider the other person's feelings when we are making decisions. We agreed to be honest with one another and to do what we can to keep our relationship healthy and long-lasting. We also agreed, however, that the marriage is over as soon as one of us "falls out of love" or for whatever other reason can't abide by the promises we did make.

 

But that is MY relationship, not yours. If your wife or husband is fine with ownership and so are you, then that's great.

[angelkin 1,326]

Potato, potahto...we call it veto power. Yes, we allow each other to have sex with others...and I tell him all the time this is his ass. Has he used his veto, yep - several times much to my dismay. However, I respect him and would not do anything he wasn't comfortable with. Have I used mine, yep - he doesn't like it either. However, it works for us and we both have to agree or any deal is off completely.

[mauijanedoe 1,414]

I don't get bent at the concept of someone saying he shares his wife. It might be semantics, or their kink or a true reflection of the nature of their relationship. I flinch a little at the idea that someone owns someone else, even after it's softened with an explanation of the limits of said ownership. There, though, I think it's just mostly semantics with a side of agency. In either case, though, it's not my relationship so I don't actually care even it's all the literal truth and comes with a D/s contract and a collar.

 

We do have theoretical veto power, because it came up in a "what if" conversation and that was the simplest resolution. I can't see ever vetoing someone with a "because I said so," though, because I have enough children and don't actually need another one. I'm far more likely to take km34's tack of explaining what and why and the likely consequences and then being pissy if I wasn't heeded. I suspect Mr. Doe's response would be the same, except that I'd never get to that point. If he felt strongly enough to say something, I would immediately stop. Does that mean he owns my ass? Maybe. Or maybe that I love and respect him enough that sometimes I will allow his judgment to overrule mine.

 

So I'm voting potato, potahto.

[slevin 1,374]

Chicup; would you use the phrase "I decided to share my wife with this guy" to describe a situation? I highly doubt it, because even if you did decide, so did your wife. It was something you decided together. Someone posting with that kind of language is often betraying their inner thought process. Like Julie said, you can usually get a feeling for whether it was just someones idea of swinger language, or whether it shows an actual issue or not. I agree with you and I think a lot of people feel a similar thing, even if they wouldn't refer to it as ownership, or allowing their spouse to do something. I think it's a pretty healthy thing when it truly goes both ways. The people using the language though most often seem to have an unhealthy perspective on it.

 

I think if you look at the post this was prompted by, the progressive replies from the OP show some serious control tendencies. I think the people picking out specific language there were on track. That said, it's probably wise to try and take a step back and make sure that we're not just nitpicking things.

[Guest EastBayCouple]

Chicup, that post was FANTASTIC! I love it!

 

There definitely are a lot of issues with implied vs. intended semantics,m but it sure is fun to discuss them on a forum... which is even more interesting since the lack of tonality and body language makes text-only communication infinitely more difficult.

 

I tend to agree. I love my wife and wouldn't want to do anything that she wouldn't "allow" me to do, and vice versa. If she says something is ok, and I do it, and it bothers her and then she changes her mind and tells me not to do it again... DONE! She owns me, and I'm owned by her!

[Chicup 41]

Chicup; would you use the phrase "I decided to share my wife with this guy" to describe a situation? I highly doubt it, because even if you did decide, so did your wife. It was something you decided together. Someone posting with that kind of language is often betraying their inner thought process. Like Julie said, you can usually get a feeling for whether it was just someones idea of swinger language, or whether it shows an actual issue or not. I agree with you and I think a lot of people feel a similar thing, even if they wouldn't refer to it as ownership, or allowing their spouse to do something. I think it's a pretty healthy thing when it truly goes both ways. The people using the language though most often seem to have an unhealthy perspective on it.

 

I think if you look at the post this was prompted by, the progressive replies from the OP show some serious control tendencies. I think the people picking out specific language there were on track. That said, it's probably wise to try and take a step back and make sure that we're not just nitpicking things.

 

Astute observation slevin.

 

I personally do not like the term "share my wife" but I've heard enough people using it who are not using it in a negative way to say that many do. My distaste with the word share I think has less to do with the ownership aspect as the word itself. You share a burden, you share food, you share money, that sort of thing. Something is lost by sharing . The idea of "sharing the love" I find equally wrong semantically. One can spread love and joy, but sharing it would imply you take some from me, so we both have some but I have less.

 

So if I "shared" my wife you are taking something from me, and I am diminished in return. Being I do not see my self somehow diminished in swinging I think the term is inappropriate.

 

If I want to be pedantic about it, the term "share my wife" should only be used by new swingers where the man would much rather just have sex with other women and not let his wife but he does so because he can't argue logically against it. He feels he is losing something in the bargain but is being nice and allows it. I'd say our first swinging encounter was like this because I really was unsure of my wife going off to another room to have sex with some other guy, but I felt it was "even" because I was having sex with his wife. The proper language for that would be a "swap" or a trade (often used in lifestyle talking as well). We both equally lost and gained so it was a fair trade.

 

That was over 10 years ago and we have long since matured in the lifestyle, and share/trade/swap no longer apply to us, but allow most definitely does. Other swingers I think simply keep using the language without always thinking about it very deeply, so I'm not going to get upset if they use the term "sharing my wife".

[VegasLee 1,486]

In all the years we have been together I cannot remember Laura ever asking me if she could "party" with someone.

 

I do remember a few times in our life that she "allowed" me to sleep on the couch though.

[Just Passing By 140]

Ah , semantics , contextual implications , and plain 'ol Context.

 

If you and Mrs Chicup understand and are happily on the same page, it doesn't matter if anyone else likes it , and only those that either or both of you play with need to understnd to a degree.

 

That being said , your opening statement does make a certain implication, even though the further explination does somewhat modify that.

 

Could it be that it is just word choice , and your actual thought process is more equal and collabertive ? Maybe. Could it be that there is an element of Control and Power Exchnge ? Maybe.

 

There is a long continium of Sexual and Relationship dynamics. If you're happy , and Mrs Chicup is happy with (whatever is actually taking place here) , congradulations , and enjoy !

[slevin 1,374]

I think Chicup's main point wasn't that he owns his wife, but rather that he does, actually, allow his wife to do certain things. Just like she allows him to do certain things. They are married and as such they allow each other to do things and voice their opposition to other things. As a healthy marriage they listen to the opposition of their spouse. I know that in my marriage if Mrs S said she didn't want us to swing anymore, we wouldn't. As such she would be disallowing me to swing.

 

My view is that Chicup was challenging a common opposition to the phrases similar to "I allowed my spouse to...". Recently there has been a definite opposition to the implications of that kind of phrase and Chicup was showing an alternative perspective on the use of the phrase. Showing that it's not always about a misogynistic ownership, but rather that it can be a healthy respect for each other in a relationship.

[Desdemona1980 297]

I think Chicup's main point wasn't that he owns his wife, but rather that he does, actually, allow his wife to do certain things. Just like she allows him to do certain things. They are married and as such they allow each other to do things and voice their opposition to other things. As a healthy marriage they listen to the opposition of their spouse. I know that in my marriage if Mrs S said she didn't want us to swing anymore, we wouldn't. As such she would be disallowing me to swing.

 

My view is that Chicup was challenging a common opposition to the phrases similar to "I allowed my spouse to...". Recently there has been a definite opposition to the implications of that kind of phrase and Chicup was showing an alternative perspective on the use of the phrase. Showing that it's not always about a misogynistic ownership, but rather that it can be a healthy respect for each other in a relationship.

 

I agree. I look at it this way, if I were married and my spouse wanted to use our emergency savings account to buy a new car we did't need, I wouldn't allow it. We would discuss, possibly argue or fight over it. If I thought or knew he was going to do it anyway, I would go as far as moving the money to a new account he did not have access to, all in the name of protecting us financially.

 

If one partner needs to disallow the other from having sex with an outside party because it will cause turmoil in the relationship or makes them uncomfortable, I see that as protecting the primary relationship. You can wrap it up nicely with the term veto power, but any time someone uses the veto, they are disallowing the encounter.

 

It actually is healthy and smart to disallow certain things or behaviors within a relationship to keep it strong and protect it. What each person/relationship can allow will differ from couple to couple and that's ok.

[slevin 1,374]

If one partner needs to disallow the other from having sex with an outside party because it will cause turmoil in the relationship or makes them uncomfortable, I see that as protecting the primary relationship. You can wrap it up nicely with the term veto power, but any time someone uses the veto, they are disallowing the encounter.

 

It actually is healthy and smart to disallow certain things or behaviors within a relationship to keep it strong and protect it. What each person/relationship can allow will differ from couple to couple and that's ok.

 

Absolutely. I also think that both partners making it a primary goal to protect their relationship is important for swinging. When both partners are focused on that any bumps in the road can be worked out. This goes along with what you were describing. In a case where one person wants to veto something, the other will respect that. At the very least they'll discuss it openly and come to a joint decision, agreement, or understanding.

[sweet_tna 680]

Mr. Sweet is fond of the following (playful) argument. He'll say that my tits and my ass are "his" to play with, usually whilst grabbing them. I will remind him that the aforementioned parts are on MY body, and therefore mine to use as I see fit. "You signed 'em over to me when we got hitched," he'll say. I'll grab his crotch and remind him that, "And you signed these over to me, so . . HA!" The point being, of course, that we agreed when we got married that what's his is mine, and what's mine is his--not just the material crap, but mind, body, heart, and soul. In essence, we DO "own" each other's asses, and have the right to "allow" each other to do something or not.

 

That said, neither of us uses that power without the courtesy of an explanation. (That's where that whole mutual respect thing comes in.)

 

Gotta' love semantics. . .

 

=)

[km34 672]

Sorry but I do in fact own her ass, though perhaps a lease agreement would be more clear. I do not own it in a "Your name is Toby!" kinda way, I own it as in we made basic agreements that if she violates that lease is broken kinda way. She does not get to just have sex with someone because she feels like it. I get input. This is also a two way street, I do not get to just have sex without her approval. She has in fact used that "veto" once.

 

I very much like the lease agreement idea. A lease acknowledges certain rights and responsibilities necessary from both parties and is negotiable. Ownership, not so much.

[10thBadger 25]

On 8/10/2012 at 8:44 PM, Chicup said:

There I said it.

 

I see there seems to be some forum angst over using this sort of language (or the term share my wife) in a few posts lately.

 

This denotes ownership and I fully claim it. We are a married couple, we made promises to each other, and in those promises was the idea that our sexuality was now tied together. As long as it is tied together any sex she has outside of our relationship is truly allowed by me. I can revoke it at any time. If she chooses to ignore this and goes a head with it anyways she is in breach of those promises we made and it would be grounds for dissolving our relationship.

 

You can say we are joined, bonded, intertwined or any other more romantic but less pejorative term but it doesn't change it, I OWN her ass and I decide who gets to touch it as long as she wishes to be with me.

 

This does not mean I can force her to have relations with other people, but it does mean I have a say in who those other people are. If they make me uncomfortable in any way I can pull the plug and she will just have to live with it.

 

As should be obvious but I think I'll need to state this goes BOTH ways. She ALLOWS me. If she pulls the plug on a couple, thats it, I don't get to have sex with that other woman ever again. If they make her uncomfortable in any way, well I'll just have to live with it. If I choose to ignore that, she has grounds to permanently terminate our relationship.

 

We are NOT just people living together and raising kids together, who are free to go their own way without responsibility to each other. To be poetic we are now of one body, and WE must both decide how those bodies get used and if they get used. We must both agree or there is no more argument.

10thBadger,

 

Both I and my wife, We love when you make a post. My wife just snatched me off the elliptical to help me read this. I believe you are absolutely correct and so does my wife. My wife says that you sound just like me CHICUP. Straight to the point and unyielding in your thoughts. It is almost refreshing to hear you say those things, when so many other men make excuses for not putting their foot down. Between you and Susan, your posts are awesome. We call Susan, switchblade Susan. My wife told me that Susan may not even have a funny bone if she went for a check up at the doctor lol but she is straightforward.

 

I agree with everything that you said and so does my wife.

 

10thBadger/Badgers wife