Singles are not "swingers"?

[beardedone 50]

In a recent public chat, the hostess implied that singles that are in the lifestyle may not actually be swinging. I contend that if you're single and playing with anyone "married" that you are in fact, swinging. Yes, there are many sublevels of that definition, but I think y'all get the point.

 

What do you think?

[mauijanedoe 1,414]

Heh. I think that might have been me, but to explain to everyone else, the topic was "Things we "know" are true," and the aim was to examine truisms and take them apart.

 

Since I've been fighting the "of course singles can be swingers" fight since 2003, I'm pretty clear that, yes, singles can be swingers. And, I'm actually not really interested, except in a fairly distant "oh, what a lovely bug," sort of way, in hearing people say they aren't. Just so I'm direct about my actual feelings on the matter.

[rubenpal2 26]

Sorry, the way we see it is that singles can't be considered swingers due to the fact that a single man or woman are like single vanilla people. Vanilla men and woman are interested in the same thing as singles who are thinking they are swingers. Now the way we see it and figure it is that swingers are a married man or woman, or man and man, or woman and woman that swap partners and/or include a single person to be involved in with whatever the couple likes them involved with. We do not want to hurt any feelings or step on any feet, but if singles are considered swingers than I guess every single person out in the world are swingers. Hey thanks for reading, this is a good conversational piece.

[beardedone 50]

I don't wish to be misunderstood. IMO, singles can actually be swingers if they understand the LS and play with married people whose spouse approves. if the spouse does not know, then that is just cheating, and morally wrong on the part of the non-single. Anyway, singles can be swingers.

[VegasLee 1,486]

The first definition of swinging was "Recreational sex between consenting adults."

 

60's Swinging Singles was the big thing.

 

Nothing ever said someone had to be married or partnered to be a swinger.

 

80's came along and a certain group started pushing the "Lifestyle" and that it was for couples.

 

In the close to 40 years of having "Recreational sex with other consenting adults" I have been both a single and married.

 

I have never let others define what my place in life or this "Lifestyle" is.

 

Really, does not matter. As long as we are all having fun and happy with what you do works for you.

 

Just because I may not agree with you or you don't agree with me does not make either of us wrong.

[northindycpl 32]

What an interesting question... One I have been thinking if a lot myself.

 

When Mr. Indy was alive we were swingers- full-on living in the 'lifestyle' with our friends and parties and trips and had a great time. He passed away and I became single

 

As a single chick... I can go sport fuck whatever guy I want but often there are strings- dates, feelings, not playing with multiple people, etc. and I really missed my friends and just the freedom of the life style - clubs, trips, parties, etc. I decided to reconnect with a few married couple friends and make new friends. It a lot different now as a single bi-girl in the ls but I feel comfortable and at home.

 

I think being a swinger or not - married or single- is all about your mindset. It's the way in which you play with others that defines it.

[Chicup 42]

Here is my litmus test.

 

Has a vanilla ever talked about a single as a swinger to you, who didn't know you were swingers? We get 'told' by people about 'swingers' in our area, but not once, ever, have those 'swingers' been singles.

 

My question though is why do singles so desperately seem to want to label themselves as swingers. It is not a club, it is simply a label. You don't get anything for it.

 

In much older parlance, yes a "swinger" would just be more of a causal sex enthusiast but then it would have nothing to do with anything we call swinging today directly. Two singles having sex by that definition would be "swingers" and really in that case the term becomes meaningless.

[VegasLee 1,486]

So what has happened by your view is a group has changed a definition to fit their views in today's world.

 

If it is just a "label" for one I can only assume it is just a label for a couple.

 

I agree though. Labels mean nothing. It is just something to do that we enjoy. Too many feel the need to apply labels. I don't think it is so much singles looking to have the label as it is some couples not wanting singles to have the label.

[Chicup 42]

So what has happened by your view is a group has changed a definition to fit their views in today's world.

 

 

Pretty much. I wouldn't care if it went back to "wife swapping" and if we got rid of "lifestyle" the BDSM people would be happy because I'm told we stole that one from them. What language does need to do though is convey meaning. The more dilute the term, the less meaning it has.

 

Swinger if it includes singles, is either an inadequate word to describe what a husband and wife do, or the improper word to describe a single.

[Emily & Art 19]

Hmmm...... good question. "Can singles be swingers?" I'll answer from a my experiences perspective.

 

We've been in "the lifestyle" for a few years now and the parties we go to typically allow singles. I've noticed that there is a high attrition rate among the singles. There are two that I can recall that seem to keep showing up. But overall it appears that singles don't really last in swinging. I think that is due to the fact that they do get laid but they end the night alone. That's a lonely place to be.

 

Additionally, the couples all bring something to offer to the party, their partner. The singles only bring themselves.

 

In summary, I vote yes, singles can be swingers. But, it's very hard to be a single swinger.

 

Just my two cents

[carebear 90]

I was talking with a single friend. She occasionally plays, and DH really likes her. So do I, btw. She was talking about needing to be in the right head space to play, and said 'But it's not as fun when I go home alone and you don't. That's why it works for couples I think.'

 

I do know there are many successful single swingers. I just wonder how many relate with how she was feeling?

[beardedone 50]

For singles there is a large difference between dating with sex and swinging. If you are playing with another person's mate, that is swinging, IMO, and requires a different mindset from dating.

 

Now, group gropes, even if they are all single, becomes a grey area.

[angelkin 1,326]

I think I am a swinger because I've been part of a couple in the lifestyle. Just because we're not swapping anymore, doesn't mean I am not still a swinger. Call me whatever you like, I am a swinger.

[DigginIt 1,132]

I found this on Urban Dictionary: A lifestyle of nonmonogamy where sexual relations occur outside the established couple. Swingers tend to refrain from romantic attachments with their outside partners, thus differentiating themselves from Polyamorists. There is some overlap between the two communities, though the closeness of the comparisons are generally not acknowledged.

 

Officially, I think that singles participate in swinging activities but to swing implies two people committed to each other having consensual sex with other partners.

 

Really, who fucking cares about what you call it.

[junglecouple 128]

"Swinger" is often a word used by singles to hook up. It sounds better to them, more legit. When, in fact, many of them that call themselves "swingers" would never allow their future mate be used as they themselves have used other couples. Nothing wrong with that I guess, but "what's in a name?" One gets you ignored, the other makes you feel/seem cooler.

[two4youinswva 3,068]

I suppose I get where both sides of the argument are coming from. For me, I easily see those that played as a couple but are now single as swingers. That's pretty much a given in my mind. As for those that have always been involved in the swinging scene as a single, that's almost a case by case basis for me. I think many singles really get it, and others, not so much. Of course, the same could be said about some couples, couldn't it?

 

Meh, it's just a name and a label in the end. Doesn't change anyone's involvement or success in the swinging world. It does guarantee a 2-3 page thread with a variety of opinions, sometimes passionate, around here every 6-12 months, so it's got that going for it.

[SwingSetWife 444]

Here is my litmus test.

 

Has a vanilla ever talked about a single as a swinger to you, who didn't know you were swingers? We get 'told' by people about 'swingers' in our area, but not once, ever, have those 'swingers' been singles.

 

My question though is why do singles so desperately seem to want to label themselves as swingers. It is not a club, it is simply a label. You don't get anything for it.

 

In much older parlance, yes a "swinger" would just be more of a causal sex enthusiast but then it would have nothing to do with anything we call swinging today directly. Two singles having sex by that definition would be "swingers" and really in that case the term becomes meaningless.

 

 

My question is: why are some "swingers" so desperate to -not- label singles as swingers? It is not a club, and you don't lose anything for it.

[SwingSetWife 444]

I found this on Urban Dictionary: A lifestyle of non-monogamy where sexual relations occur outside the established couple. Swingers tend to refrain from romantic attachments with their outside partners, thus differentiating themselves from PolyAmorists. There is some overlap between the two communities, though the closeness of the comparisons are generally not acknowledged.

 

Officially, I think that singles participate in swinging activities but to swing implies two people committed to each other having consensual sex with other partners.

 

Really, who fucking cares about what you call it.

 

I agree with this definition... mostly. Except for the "where sexual relations occur outside the established couple". Couple or single, I think that once you decide to live a lifestyle of non-monogamy, you change a lot about yourself and the way you live your life. And I think these changes are meaningful, not meaningless as some have implied. There is a difference between a "swinging single" and someone simply going out and having one-night stands with random people from random bars. The latter is just doing something that some singles do to get their rocks off while single. The former is a conscious decision about how you do/will construct your sexual experiences over an extended period of time.

 

As for "who cares"... That was my first thought when I saw the title, but mostly because I have seen this talked to death. But we have to remember that all of us have not been here for 10+ years and some subjects are going to keep coming up, and deserve to keep coming up because definitions, concepts, and perspectives change over time. But it actually does matter, and I actually do care. Because when I think about swinging (or anything that is not the societal norm) there needs to be a sense of community, especially for beginners. It isn't like we have a whole lot of other places to go for advice or to just talk about experiences, etc. I think there are some here the would disagree with that. However, I think that simply being here is proof enough that everyone here agrees with that to some extent. We are all here for advice, to give or receive, or to talk about swinger topics. That is community. If we didn't think it was important we would be on forums sharing cat pictures or some shit like that.

 

On the topic of community, the main reason it bothers me that "singles can't be swingers" is because if we say that, then we are excluding a huge part of what swinging as a couple entails. Not everyone does or has to play with singles, but a lot of couples play with singles sometimes or even exclusively. If singles can't be swingers, than swingers can't be swingers when playing with singles.

[mauijanedoe 1,414]

I suppose I get where both sides of the argument are coming from. For me, I easily see those that played as a couple but are now single as swingers. That's pretty much a given in my mind. As for those that have always been involved in the swinging scene as a single, that's almost a case by case basis for me. I think many singles really get it, and others, not so much. Of course, the same could be said about some couples, couldn't it?

 

Meh, it's just a name and a label in the end. Doesn't change anyone's involvement or success in the swinging world. It does guarantee a 2-3 page thread with a variety of opinions, sometimes passionate, around here every 6-12 months, so it's got that going for it.

 

It does cause a long thread each time this topic rises up again, so there's that.

 

I certainly wouldn't argue that all singles involved in swinging are swingers, because they're not. I've noted more than once that the question every single man we've met has gotten wrong is whether they'd do some form of non-monogamy within a relationship. For me, that's a deal breaker, because, really, why would I be interested in doing something with you that you wouldn't want your wife or girlfriend to do? What does bother me about the topic - and it's pretty consistent whenever "who fits in the (whatever) tent" comes up - is when people not covered by the question are the ones who are loudly saying yes or no.

 

There is some part of me that wonders if they really should be getting a vote.

[Chicup 42]

What does bother me about the topic - and it's pretty consistent whenever "who fits in the (whatever) tent" comes up - is when people not covered by the question are the ones who are loudly saying yes or no.

 

There is some part of me that wonders if they really should be getting a vote.

 

I don't know what you mean in terms of who is covered by the question.

[sunbuckus 3,569]

It does cause a long thread each time this topic rises up again, so there's that.

 

I was so tempted to link an older thread to this one concerning the topic...making a long thread longer!

[SW_PA_Couple 4,026]

In some of the states and most provinces, it is illegal to use the honorific "engineer" or "PE" with you name in business correspondence or advertisements unless you have been examined and approved by a board or ministry of professional registration. I wonder if we need a similar board of registration for swingers. I will be happy to perform the duties of "examiner" for any female applicants. The board can even administer a title "swinger in training". I will even refuse to accept a salary.

[Emily & Art 19]

Excellent idea PA Couple. I will also selflessly volunteer my person to serve on the examiners board.

[two4youinswva 3,068]

The good news is they finally came up with definitive criteria for being a swinger.

 

The bad news is, only two people qualified, and they are a lesbian couple in Pahrump, Nevada.

[Chicup 42]

The good news is they finally came up with definitive criteria for being a swinger.

 

The bad news is, only two people qualified, and they are a lesbian couple in Pahrump, Nevada.

 

See, not singles.

[M1F2KTJ 473]

married couples playing with singles are swingers. singles playing with married couples are having fun.

[Emily & Art 19]

I think that's the best definition yet.

[beardedone 50]

married couples playing with singles are swingers. singles playing with married couples are having fun.

 

I must disagree. A single having sex with a mated (married, living together, going steady, what have you) person is VASTLY different from having sex with another single. That is where the definitions and more importantly, the morals, differ. I submit that a single (or mated) having sex with a mated person without the mates permission is flat out adultery, but *with* the mates permission, is swinging.

 

Now, "swinging" as a word has multiple uses, like so many in the English language. Singles and marrieds can have "a swinging time" without any sex involved, using popular jargon. But we all know what it's called when sex is involved.