Leaderboard

We are not swinging due to corona virus. YMMV.

I think of swinging as something of an umbrella term or catch all phrase, generally meaning some form of group sex, but not always. I notice enough married couples here don’t apply the term for singles. I am not one for labels but will say I have participated in swinging activities as a single female and met my FWB on a swinger site, we have participated in swinger activities together. Currently he is the only one in my social bubble, something we’ve discussed. Plenty of requests for the unicorn or bull to show a desire for the singles participation. There is something about saying it is a married only activity when at the same time there are multiple requests for our company somehow leaves me feeling a little less of a player. I am a little sensitive today. But I also fully understand and respect those that choose to only play with other married couples.

I'd have to agree. Everything with swinging comes with some risk, so as always it comes down to risk assessment and what your tolerance level of that is. Nowhere near an expert an anything related to this, but I can't think of a much better way to transmit or catch a respiratory disease than sex. Take away the kissing (which would be a dealkiller for us right there), then think about the typical sexual encounter - enclosed space, man on top of woman, missionary, face to face, he's panting and breathing hard, she's panting and breathing hard, and this goes on for a while. Seems to me you almost couldn't come up with a better way of transmission if you tried. There's a huge IF there though, that only matters if one of them has it...which leads us right back to level of risk. I guess you could dream up ways you hoped would reduce to some degree the risk, like no oral, doggie style or reverse cowgirl only, both be masked, etc. But for us it would be like the no kissing thing, when you start taking pieces away, pretty soon the whole thing falls apart and it's just not worth the trouble anymore.

Swinging in my view is a couples game. Committed couples (married or not) engaging in consensual non-monogamy are 'swinging'. A hot wife (married woman playing alone - with permission of the hubby) is swinging. A married man, playing on a hall pass, granted by his wife, is swinging. A single, who is playing with a swinger couple is hardly 'swinging'. They are simply hooking up with swingers. There is no underlying societal expectation of monogamy for a single. Two singles, i.e. FWB's - same thing. They are not swinging - they are hooking up with a couple who swings Now, if those FWB's are in committed relationships to other people and they are playing with their knowledge and permission - they are swingers!

Lame. A guy just has to do what a woman is expected to do - oral on one while fucking the other. It's true, women are just better at multitasking.

My husband and I have been together for a long time and have developed a rich and varied sex life. Part of the credit goes to our play partners. Other men have done things to me that have so thrilled me that I have had my husband do them at home. Or they have asked me to make moves on them that I have later tried out on my husband. The same is true for my husband, who has brought back moves from his swinging experiences. Of course, some activities work only with specific partners. Still, our marital sex has definitely benefitted from our extramarital experiences.

It appears you missed the point of my post entirely.

Your're understanding of the origin of the term "Spanish" flu needs some refining. It had nothing to do with bigotry against the Spanish people or any kind of intentional mis-direction. Without going through a long and boring history lesson about WWI, the suppression of news reports concerning the rapid spread of this deadly disease, and so on, suffice to say it was called the "Spanish" flu because the majority of news stories about this spread of this strain of the flue were coming from Spain's newspapers. As the stories made there way through the rest of Europe, people logically assumed Spain was ground zero, hence the name "Spanish" flu. Ironically, in Spain, it was referred to as the "French" flu because the Spanish believed it originated in France. Also, to suggest the "Spanish" flu BEGAN in Kansas is a misnomer. It was first REPORTED in Kansas. That has nothing to do with source of the disease. Modern genetic research (obviously unavailable in 1918) suggests the Spanish flu, like the current COVID-19 pandemic, originated in China. Lastly, and this general comment is not particularly aimed at you... I find it unfortunate that the discussion around this topic has taken on such an "us versus them" political tone. The fact is, there is no one-size-fits all way of managing this disease. Disease mitigation protocols that make sense in Los Angeles County California, with a population of nearly 10.5 million people, do not make sense for Buffalo County South Dakota, with a population of less than 2,000 people. The risks are entirely different. And there will always be tension where the rights of the individual are being subjugated to the will of the many. The United States is built upon a foundation that places a premium on individual liberty, not on majority rule. Contrary to currently popular labels, the United States is a representative republic, not a democracy. The difference between the two is far more than a question of semantics.