“The Google of
online dating”
— The Boston Globe
“Completely free”
— TIME
“A favorite hangout
for internet goers”
— The Village Voice
“A perfect example
of the Web 2.0 revolution”
— New York Post
|
Swinging - is 3 company and 4 a croud?
|
|
|---|---|
|
|
Enjoyourself
|
|
|
Just waiting for Calandales response to this, and the guys profile.... |
|
|
Wow... this is quite the treatise. My overall impression is that these are great ideas for people that want to hang onto their insecurities. They are largely band-aids, rather than solutions, for dealing with feelings that might arise being non-monogamous, tossing in some basic common sense safety precautions to make it look reasonable. |
|
|
I believe that as long as you and your lovers are happy, there is nothing wrong with having more then 2 or 3 people in a relationship. |
|
|
My experiences in the swinging community were mostly centered around the group parties, which is where I learned the definition of a "(slut-)puppy pile."
|
|
|
Seems more rules for insecure couples to have outside sex without addressing their own insecurities by making sure that no one gets emotionally attached. I don't get the point of sex without some emotional involvement/intimacy, so why even bother? |
|
|
@stitchwidge_d Keep in mind that the post is regarding swinging, not poly, which has a somewhat differnt goal/structure. So ideally it would not be a case of insecure, simply knowing what they want. |
|
|
^ I know, it just highlights the differences between swinging and poly, which makes it very clear why I identify much more with poly. Oh, and I do have friends who identify as swingers, and I'm fine with playing with them- but we've known each other for a long time and easily settled into a level of intimacy that works for everyone, I'm treated as a friend, not as a potential threat that must be contained by all kinds of rules. |
|
|
Perhaps some of stitchwitch_d's aversion is due to genuine differences between swinging and being poly. To me, swinging is a bit mechanistic for my tastes. Nevertheless, it can be a lot of fun. At a certain point in my life, it was useful to me.
However, the OP really is quite anal, and not in the good way. It's a small-minded pinpoint view of swinging, and it legalizes, labels, and legislates way too much. There's only one necessary rule, an it is the same rule that applies to everything else: If and when there are lines, know where and how to draw them. I am beginning to think that the concept of "alternative" is useless. The mainstream have all sorts of rules, regulations, and heuristics. They know from personal experience that they don't work, but that just makes them believe with more vigor and seek to "police" other people. Anyone who seeks to get away from that eventually finds that any word becomes a lifestyle and a community, with procrustean attitudes that are, if anything, more constraining. It happened a long time ago with BDSM: you have to read the Bibles and get a fucking virtual tattoo on your forehead about what kind of whatever you are, and there are only a limited number of choices. The people in the lifestyle and community and whatever simply want to create the mainstream in miniature. It's happened with poly. It probably inevitably happens with everything. |
|
|
I would never have that conversation. It is simply outside of any paradigm I want to embrace. It is also outside of my experience to have those questions pop up, even though I swing from time to time. Yech! The whole thing just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. |
|
|
Not to mention that despite the disclaimer about singles being equal human beings and not free sex toys, the post really shows no respect for the single or the single's swinging experience. |
|
|
What the fuck is up with this person assuming that I was "more fun" when I was single? REALLY NOW??? My man and I are plenty of fun, thank you very much! |
|
|
^Yeah, it's just generalization after generalization. |
|
|
Dude's changed his whole profile. Dude has waaay too much time on his hands... |
|
|
>Swinging - is 3 company and 4 a croud?
Dude evidently did not have the time for spellcheck. |
|
|
"I am beginning to think that the concept of "alternative" is useless. The mainstream have all sorts of rules, regulations, and heuristics. They know from personal experience that they don't work, but that just makes them believe with more vigor and seek to "police" other people. Anyone who seeks to get away from that eventually finds that any word becomes a lifestyle and a community, with procrustean attitudes that are, if anything, more constraining. It happened a long time ago with BDSM: you have to read the Bibles and get a fucking virtual tattoo on your forehead about what kind of whatever you are, and there are only a limited number of choices. The people in the lifestyle and community and whatever simply want to create the mainstream in miniature." Oh GOD yes! Seriously, one of the better posts I've seen here. Straight to the point and very, very true. Alternative (indie, underground, whatever you want to call them) movements usually very quickly stop being "movements" and start being "communities" that come with its own rituals, rules, hierarchy, symbolism, group-identity and hermetic terminology and definitions that are deemd "holy". These definitions are often made more and more precise to ultimately become too narrow. Those definitions are seen as the only ultimate truth and they start to define the roles inside such a community, whil everyone who doesn't agree or fit into them is deemd as unnecessary. This can become very restricting and limiting for people who interact in such a "community". Silly real life example: I met one guy from the D/s scene (to make it clear: I was not a part of the scene), after some initial conversation he basically said: "Well, a dominant woman is one that does this-this-that, while a submissive woman is one who does this-this-that. Now, which one are you?" I replied that according to the way he defined dominant and submissive I am neither, as I lack the tratis he descibed as submissive and at the same time lack the traits he called dominant. His reaction was symptomatic to that of a "community" member, he just said: "There's no such thing as neither. Everyone is either dominant or submissive,there is no other possibility! Neither just means you are ignorant of your self actualization." You could say that he was just being a jerk and the odd case, but I think he was rtaher the norm. If people belong to a certain "community" and accept the values and definitions used by that "community", then they start to see the entire world around them through the lenses of these values and definitions. This is not just true about "alternative" communities, same goes for religions or even rpg players and sport buffs. This is how group identity works, it makes you believe that there a "limited number of choices". That you are either a "goth or a punk, can't be both", either "dominating or submissive,can't be neither", that "you are a jock or a nerd, no 3rd possiblity pal!", that "All people are either the Elect or Reprobates". At one point or another, a few people will see the vlaues and rules of their respective community as limiting and decide to quit. They form some sort of movement that opposes the "ancien regime". However soon enough their own movement will in turn become a "community" and become the "ancien regime" for someone else. This is how different cultures, subcultures and religious divisions form. This is group identity. |
|
|
Regardless of how or with whom you play, it should all come down to a very basic premise: be respectful, honor boundaries, be safe, and have fun. Outside of that, anything goes. |
|
|
There are some people who do try to strictly define groups, and put way too much of their identity into group membership and labels. Myself, I like labels mostly as a communication shortcut. I'll occasionally refer to myself as goth online, not because I fit every stereotype of goths, but because it's easier than explaining that I tend to wear a lot of black, have a twisted sense of humor, which bands I like, etc. In real life, the people who know me best will refer to me being goth mostly as a way of giving me crap.Even back when I was very involved with that scene, it was more goth/punk/industrial, with some people leaning more in one direction than another, and many (myself included) being easier to just classify as freaks. I never hung out with anyone just because we liked the same bands, and I never refused to get to know someone because they were in the wrong subdivision of the wrong subculture. Likewise with poly, swinger, etc. I refer to myself as poly because that's easier than explaining that I like sex in the context of ongoing relationships with emotional attachments- but that doesn't mean that every relationship I'm in is an Officially Polyamorous Relationship, or that I'll only date/play with Officially Polyamorous People. There's a lot of people who are somewhere in the non-monogamous catagory without being easy to classify, and I don't care exactly where people fit, or even if they do, although I'm not going to hang out with someone if I can't openly discuss relationships with them. |
|
|
^^^There is plenty that is true in what you two say, but it must be who you and bwana hang out with at least to some extent. Because all the rest of us exist, including you two. And plenty of people join communities and still understand that what works for them and their friends is not the end all and be all. Most of the people in my life are perfectly capable of understanding that their experience is their experience and their preference is their preference and don't feel the need to deny the experiences and preferences of everyone else. It's just a matter of maturity. |
|
|
That's why words are appealing. I'm saying that there is a point at which they become useless. I think this has happened with "polyamorous." There is a cadre of people for whom, as far as I can tell, it means "cohabiting with two or more people one has sex with." That's the sine qua non, as far as I can tell. Two women took it upon themselves to tell me, without my actually doing anything to provoke it, that because I have not yet gotten more than one lover to live with me (though I'm working on it), I can't be polyamorous but must be in an open relationship. As far as I can tell, for them it has nothing to do with love but only cohabitation, since they didn't mention love. It doesn't seem to be terribly important to them. I don't like this because, yes, I am in an open relationship, but it is a relationship with several lovers, and that relationship is also open to others. Sometimes the others to whom it is open become long-term lovers and develop relationships with other lovers (the two are not necessarily the same), but so what? Relationships change. My relationships can even grow, which is pretty rare. Plus, I've heard an endless flow of statements that one should read this or that book, and another woman told me that she used "polyamory" as a Politically Correct term for "ethical non-monogamy" (which I don't understand: why should non-monogamy have to be qualified as ethical while monogamy is assumed to be ethical, no matter how many spouses get beaten up or children damaged due to broken homes?) That bugged me, too. This may or may not be the case with the term "poly," because it's ambiguous, but I think it will only be a matter of time before that gets all crudded up, too. So, the question is, what to do with a particular term? Do you 1) use it, knowing that it will give power to the procrusteans? Do you 2) work to unseat the procrusteans? Or do you 3) let them have their pathetic fun? I choose on a case-by-case basis, but it seems to me that most, if not all of the things in the "alternative" category aren't really worth fighting over. I'll fight like a rabid Tasmanian devil over terms like "shy" and "slut," because I think a lot of people are hurt by those categories and do not deserve to be. I'll occasionally raise a ruckus over terms like "atheist" and "skeptic," but I'll spread my criticism around. But for "polyamorous?" For "BDSM?" No; it doesn't seem worth it to me. |
This post is intended for confidant couples who are in a secure loving relationship and are considering or have begun playing sexually with other people. My goal is to provide additional ideas for your consideration which I hope will contribute meaningfully where perceptions and assumptions pre-empt understanding of experiences yet unknown.
I look forward to all comments that attack the post and not the writer.
Some argue that swinging is a great way to meet like minded people on an adult playground. To the misinformed newbie, this fertile playground ground for fun and mind-games, may pose unanticipated risks to the relationship in varying degrees, on a case by case basis. Couples intent on swinging may be better equipped to anticipate the playground’s psychologies, before donning their gear.
Every loving couple may consider that different psychology and emotions will be experienced when engaging in 2+2 verses 2+1 play. My personal observations were formed during a few years of swinging during two separate secure loving relationships. Our experiences involved couples, singles, gang bangs, new long lasting friendships, and informal insights people gave me when I asked them. The content before you was developed in the strict context of "secure loving relationships only"; which infers that any other type of relationship may report differing experiences and ideas altogether; and that the ideas presented are mainly for a Couple’s benefit, but not exclusively. I am mindful that assumptions and perceptions born of my own experiences might be of no benefit to the reader, whatsoever, since nothing stated before you is being presented as hard facts.
Writing style description and disclaimer: Each numbered statement that follows is neither a rule nor conclusion nor suggestion for actual use. The ideas they contain may just as easily be presented in the form of questions, or however else, instead of their current state of encapsulation. These ideas are for your consideration only and are never to be taken at face value or absolute truths nor are they being recommended by the author as if to be somehow worthy of inclusion into a legitimate body of subject matter already available to would be swingers.
Four's a crowd: Should you consider not playing with romantic loving couples such as yourselves initially?
Help identify and be able to anticipate a few of the various foursome paradigms.
1. Some couples seek to fill a sexual void in their relationship through swinging. The result can often be a useless pair ‘sexually speaking’, since they really do not have much sex to begin with, let alone being able to satisfy an additional sexual appetite – or two!
2. Some newbie couples never figured out who is allowed to play with whom, turning sexy fantasy into tiresome brain drain.
3. Both partners are rarely attracted to both other partners, which can lead to one partner becoming bored or jealous with no desire to participate, often resulting in only wanting to play with their own partner instead.
4. Most couples already have a sexual style. Each partner gets used to the others techniques and boundaries. The result can be a bore if they are afraid to do new things in front of each other because of what the other partner may think, feel, and observe. You cannot know how you’ll react exactly to all possible proposals yourself, until each arises.
5. If one partner in the couple feels threatened, jealous, bored, or makes the other partner feel that way, the night can come to a sudden end and the fun is over. It is wise to know your own tolerance for jealousy in yourself and others. Few are exempt from this emotion; experienced in degrees – and it may arise in the other couple even if you are solid as a rock.
Are 3s a better option for now than 4s and more?
Let’s now conceptualize, that unlike couples, you viewed singles as a sort of side-salad for a while metaphorically speaking of course - something nice - but secondary to your relationship. Can you see how the ‘circle of power’ remains between you the couple, at all times, when a Single is with you?
DISCLAIMER NOTICE The misidentification of a single as 'side-salad' may at face value appear offensive to some and is presented because of its obvious ability to provoke thinking about the less complex, perhaps easier to deal with Single experience (not the person) compared to the seemingly bigger idea of playing with Couples or more swingers. The Single people on here are just as much human beings as anyone and they are
not "side salads". They do not exist for your pleasure alone. The use of the metaphor does not assume nor is it intended to convey any idea that 'the couple' is on the top of the 'heap' despite any intellectualizing or ambiguous interpretation by the reader. Singles are not 'free sex toys' for Couples gratification and should be respected as equal not subordinate to swinging couples.
1. When you welcome a Single the circle of power remains between the inviting couple at all times. The Single has lower degrees of influence over whatever is unfolding, creating an environment in which the couple may feel more secure and relaxed. That is not to say the Single may not
have their own fantasies etc, equally as eager to fulfill. The realization that a circle of power exists and can be chosen is the only reason for making the point.
3. Couples can be more choosy about who they invite to party with them because they do not have to match up two sexy people at the same time. It can take time to find one sexy suitor let alone two.
4. There are more singles that like to party, or are have free time to party, than there are couples. Singles usually have fewer commitments than couple at weekends – increasing the diversity in availability should yield a better match, rather than just hooking up for lack of alternatives.
5. Singles usually feel freer to experiment (on a person by person basis) and may therefore be more accepting of your play style or play suggestions. Couples don’t always allow each other all the freedoms a Single might be up for.
6. Couples do not feel a strong need to befriend a Single the way they might with a couple, so a one time overnight meaningful relationship is a great option if you’re not trying to make new friends by it. You have the fun, then life goes on. Respect the Single Person – no one is a toy.
7. Couples may receive more pleasure from Singles because of the availability of giving and receiving attention more of the time. 2+2s often waste a lot of time getting things on by chatting and making friends (a good outcome). Know your expectations or Couples may disappoint you.
8. Couples might enjoy a Single guy, then a Single girl, and so on, making things fair and equal. This can be especially fun for bi-sexual couples. If one partner feels the other partner is receiving more attention more of the time, they can increase play time with the other gender. If you feel you may be objectifying Singles by adopting this idea then get yourselves a prostitute instead. Remain respectful to all no matter your own personal needs.
9. For secure couples who love their individual freedoms, a Single may give you the sense of freedom more than a couple might, usually because of the type of conversation.
10. YOU were more fun when you were single. One of the reasons you want to swing is because you also seek fun (not only sex). A relationship generally slows things down. It seems Singles are in fun mode and ready for action more of the time. Couple’s maybe not so much. If you have a few lousy attempts with Couples at the beginning of time, you may give up.
Here are 10 rules for discussion that can decrease jealous tendencies and misguided affections and improve new experiences with others. These ideas should be dissected and reassembled as a Couple, together; a process by which feelings of security
and integrity-of-cause arise to illuminate your intuitive position (you may not know you have). Resulting discussions will increase greater structural unity and deeper emotional connection as you discover and acknowledge truths in yourselves and each other.
These rules are not being imposed or even suggested for actual nor direct use. I recommend you change them to suite yourselves and use or lose them at your own discretion.
Discuss whether these rules are true or rubbish – have the discussion!
1. Do not search for new people on-line by yourself.
2. Do not add new singles to your individual IMs only.
3. When you agree to meet and therefore need to get their phone number, the female partner may not put the other male number in her phone and vice versa. You do this to eliminate possibility of private contact by opposite genders. Is this a logical precaution based on security or is it based on mutual trust? E.g. Should a Single male ever be given the idea that it is OK to contact Her – and vice versa?
4. Only play with a Single guy once and then move on. This ensures that He remains Her most desirable play mate by eliminating any opportunity for her to begin favoring ‘the guy’ as a result of careless repetition and familiarity. It is smarter for Him to take new cues from the Single guy so he can offer - what is new - Himself. She should ensure He never feels more threatened by male ego and pride than he needs to be. Your tolerances and jealousies will be exposed by exploring this rule.
5. You can play with the same Single girl twice but no more, on condition that She feels like it (not Him). It seems rare for girls to find other girls who fully satisfy each other. Younger single girls can often be a bit uptight and may be too inexperienced in giving, ending up with all the attention. The Couple’s She won’t be amused. But when it is all on for both girls He might be open to one more good time. Do women tend to be more secure about relationships than men and for that reason allowed this rule? The idea of limitation by gender is only presented here in order to provoke and inform the Couple’s intentions and understandings more clearly rather than state something categorically. What role does equality play in your relationship?
6. Each partner may insist on ending the evening at any point in time without the other partner questioning them. Is this rule easy or hard to agree to?
7. Be upfront with Singles and tell them what you want before you meet. Couples often present a greater mystery and less receptiveness to new ideas. Singles are much more open and very suggestive. Does this ring true for you?
8. Either partner may eliminate a play candidate during the situation without explaining. Is a simple mention from one of you good enough or do you foresee an argument ensuing in front of other people?
9. Insist on condoms during penetration - play safe not sorry.
10. Do not allow penises that have penetrated anuses to enter vaginas without a good wash. It looks great in porn but women are prone to very uncomfortable Ural infections. Guys, apart form your well-meant all be they pithy empathetic apologies when she gets it, there will be no sex and much
moaning for 14 more days (Guys - the wrong motivation for the right result is still better than not considering anything at all!).
You may like to consider agreeing to leave say 3 weekends or more for yourselves before swinging again. Will it ensure you play together and nurture your own relationship first? Is your relationship more important than Swinging could ever be? Be vigilant in avoiding addiction to external sexual experiences. If you do not, things can change between you soon after either one partner begins to identify with receiving more pleasure or fun when playing with other people rather than each other. Should you lose the sexual chemistry between you as a result, it may be the beginning of the end of your relationship, or much needed hard work to reignite the spark.
Is your perception that playing with a Couple is less complicated than with a Single?
Do you think Couples offer more security and or opportunities for jealousy than Singles do? Is the question even relevant?
Rules you agree to beforehand, whether these ones or your own, favour more secure structures that will serve your relationship, your play time and the quality of your experiences even more. Is this true?
If your secure loving relationship is the empire you built on shaky ground, swinging may be the faceless enemy you invited to divide and conquer it.