The Swinging Lifestyle

[Eos of the Eons]

In the interests of completeness, there's a third.

It is a two-tiered approach where a woman has children with a dangerous man, possibly a brutal sociopath, and then later looks for a gentle man to help raise them.

This seems to be, by a fairly large margin, the majority way to do things in the American South. I cannot speak for other areas; possibly in the Midwest this is rarer. It may be a largely modern phenomenon, but then again, it may have gone on for a long time in different forms.

Yeah, and you can look at it in my scenario...the dangerous men seed the women, and then leave them - or the women get a clue and leave. The dangerous man just goes on and gets another dumb woman pregnant. The non-monogamous and dumb, yet somewhat successful approach to seeding many instead of sticking with one.

The women are then stuck with finding stepfathers they should have had the children with. The kids will still not fare as well. It would be better to have been fathered by a gentle man than just have the gentle man as a step father.

 

[epepke]

Originally posted by Eos of the Eons Yeah, and you can look at it in my scenario...the dangerous men seed the women, and then leave them - or the women get a clue and leave. The dangerous man just goes on and gets another dumb woman pregnant. The non-monogamous and dumb, yet somewhat successful approach to seeding many instead of sticking with one.

I consider this a third, separate case, for three reasons:

1) In a substantial number of these cases, the sociopathic man does not want to leave, and the woman takes out a restraining order, which would hardly be necessary if the male simply wanted to impregnate as many females as possible.

2) In order for this behavior to be connected to swinging, you would have to show a higher incidence of sociopathy amongst swingers, which is not the case.

3) Your descrption focuses on the activity of the males and the passivity of the females, but organized swinging is fairly strongly matriarchal.

 

[VicDaring]

Quick story:

I had a guy try to set me up with his wife a number of years ago.

It was a weird thing. The wife and I had uh...had a few drinks and done some things that would definitely be called a foul if we had been playing hockey a few weeks previous. So when the husband pulled me aside to talk, I thought, "Okay, if he wants to take a poke at me, I deserve it."

Instead, he tells me the wife wants to know how to get ahold of me so we can pick up where we left off. I probably looked a little confused so he tells me they do this from time-to-time. As long as the other knows what's going on, it's cool.

I thought about it for maybe a couple seconds, and realized this just wasn't for me. I told the guy, "Look, I was full of booze and my judgement wasn't what it should have been a couple weeks ago. Thanks but..."

Then, I had maybe the weirdest moment of my life so far, when I got a sort of, "What, my wife's not good enough for you?" reaction from this guy. He was actually offended that I wouldn't sleep with his wife.

I had to convince him that it was just not something I would be comfortable with. Nothing to do with him or his wife and that by "bad judgement" I meant messing around with a married woman, not necessarily his wife.

I was expecting the guy to be mad that I had touched his wife in the first place. Turned out, he was mad that I stopped. Weird.

For what it's worth, in retrospect, I tend to think I shoulda slept with her. Different experience and all.

 

[epepke]

Quick story:

I had a guy try to set me up with his wife a number of years ago.

This story sounds quite ugly to me. It isn't what swinging is about: swinging is about being straightforward and honest up front.

 

[Eos of the Eons]

I consider this a third, separate case, for three reasons:

1) In a substantial number of these cases, the sociopathic man does not want to leave, and the woman takes out a restraining order, which would hardly be necessary if the male simply wanted to impregnate as many females as possible.

2) In order for this behavior to be connected to swinging, you would have to show a higher incidence of sociopathy amongst swingers, which is not the case.

3) Your descrption focuses on the activity of the males and the passivity of the females, but organized swinging is fairly strongly matriarchal.

Very few swingers in the spread seed scenario, I'm sorry if I looked like I was saying all swingers were into the seed spreading scenario...some of the swingers may just be the usual men who like to play around until they are serious about settling down. It's the guys who never want to ever settle down with only one woman forever I call seed spreaders.

I find seed spreaders to be the jealous types as well.

My scenarios did focus more on men, as it seems more women are strongly monogamous from the get go.

You can't have seed spreaders without there being some females resulting in the same mindset.

It's the non jealous types that make the best swingers I imagine.

Swingers are a minority...I just can't see there being totally monogamous types like myself being a majority among them. There just has to be more seed spreaders, but a very minority that aren't the usual seed spreaders.

Your psychopath seed spreaders are a minority as well...the other extreme right? Most folks are in the middle somewhere.

Is all very complicated. I'm just basing my observations on a show I saw on "reproduction strategies"...and extrapolating to say that monogamous sorts just don't make good swingers.

 

[epepke]

Very few swingers in the spread seed scenario, I'm sorry if I looked like I was saying all swingers were into the seed spreading scenario.

I'm not offended; I'm just trying to point out why I think it's a different dynamic.

..some of the swingers may just be the usual men who like to play around until they are serious about settling down.

Not as many as you'd think. Most of the men I've met in swinging already have settled down and have a steady wife or girlfriend. Swinging does not follow (to borrow a phrase from astronomy) the "main sequence." Most people into swinging are perfectly happy in their relationships. They just do this because they enjoy it.

From your terminology, "seed spreaders" seem naturally unattracted to swinging. The ones I've known seem to be into the challenge of seduction, but in swinging, there really is no challenge.

There's a fairly large cohort that insists that swinging is only for couples. They're mostly wrong, but not entirely. Some clubs only admit couples. Some refuse to admit single males but admit single females. Others admit single males but refuse to admit single females. The first time I went to a swing club was as part of a couple, but I found that the anthropology was almost more interesting than the swinging, and I prefer to do ethnography alone.

My scenarios did focus more on men, as it seems more women are strongly monogamous from the get go.

I've always wondered about that. I have a guess that whatever sex-specific behavior there is gets amplified in people who go primarily for same-sex relationships. There does seem to be more jealousy amongst lesbian couples, but I'm not sure about the relative rates of sleeping around.

It's the non jealous types that make the best swingers I imagine.

Rather say that swinging provides a challenge to jealousy, and the people who do not pass it do not last long.

I've often thought about the structure of swinging; it seems to me that it has two tiers, the more formal swing clubs and the less formal party houses. In a way, it's sort of elitist; there are layers to keep the bad people out.

Swingers are a minority...I just can't see there being totally monogamous types like myself being a majority among them.

By definition, I guess.

There just has to be more seed spreaders, but a very minority that aren't the usual seed spreaders.

Well, Bayes' theorem doesn't work so hot when there are more than two groups, and when swinging is a minority lifestyle.

You might find it interesting to go to a party house or swing club one of these days. There is absolutely no obligation to "party" yourself. In fact, most regulars don't anyway. You can even avoid seeing any sex acts by not going into the rooms so designated. But the anthropology is fascinating and itself is well worth the admission charge.

 

[ca3799]

I had a roomate once, a single guy, who was into swinging (and prostitutes). He invited everyone around to join him, but as far as I know, noone did.

Years later, I watched a documentary called "The Lifestyle" (available from Netflix) about, well, the lifestyle of swinging. The doc covered several couples and single folks over the course of one year. One guy (whose wife had died) had a special sling chair for intercourse, and the party hosters often put down padded mats in the bedrooms.

The combination of the one swinger I knew (that I know about) and the documentary leaves me feeing that swingers are, and I don't mean to insult, but sad, empty, lonely, searching for something- stuff like that. Neither the roomate or the people I saw in the doc seemed to be especially enjoying themselves in many areas of their lives. One of the couples interviewed described the damage they felt had occured to their marriage- I can still see their sad faces in my mind.
-
Obviously, I don't swing and am not interested in swinging. I guess I too am a person who has difficulty separating sexual intimacy from 'recreation'.

That's my opinion. Before the flaming, please remember you asked for my opinion.

 

[epepke]

I had a roomate once, a single guy, who was into swinging (and prostitutes). He invited everyone around to join him, but as far as I know, noone did.

Years later, I watched a documentary called "The Lifestyle" (available from Netflix) about, well, the lifestyle of swinging. The doc covered several couples and single folks over the course of one year. One guy (whose wife had died) had a special sling chair for intercourse, and the party hosters often put down padded mats in the bedrooms.

The combination of the one swinger I knew (that I know about) and the documentary leaves me feeing that swingers are, and I don't mean to insult, but sad, empty, lonely, searching for something- stuff like that. Neither the roomate or the people I saw in the doc seemed to be especially enjoying themselves in many areas of their lives. One of the couples interviewed described the damage they felt had occured to their marriage- I can still see their sad faces in my mind.
-
Obviously, I don't swing and am not interested in swinging. I guess I too am a person who has difficulty separating sexual intimacy from 'recreation'.

That's my opinion. Before the flaming, please remember you asked for my opinion.

I'm not going to flame you. I've never met anybody in swinging who was like the couple you described, but I'm sure there are people who tried it and found they didn't like it.

I do have to ask what is the value of declaring swingers particularly as sad, empty, lonely, and searching for something? It's one of those statements that is literally true, but what of it? I am attracted to swinging (or, at least I was; I haven't done it in years) because there were things there that I wanted, and it made me happier. One might as well describe people who want to go to college as "ignorant, uneducated," or people who are looking for jobs as "unemployed, layabout, deadbeat" or people who go to the hospital as "diseased, injured, unhealthy" but what is really the value, other than putting people down?

 

[Evolving_ant]

I'm not going to flame you. I've never met anybody in swinging who was like the couple you described, but I'm sure there are people who tried it and found they didn't like it.

I do have to ask what is the value of declaring swingers particularly as sad, empty, lonely, and searching for something? It's one of those statements that is literally true, but what of it? I am attracted to swinging (or, at least I was; I haven't done it in years) because there were things there that I wanted, and it made me happier. One might as well describe people who want to go to college as "ignorant, uneducated," or people who are looking for jobs as "unemployed, layabout, deadbeat" or people who go to the hospital as "diseased, injured, unhealthy" but what is really the value, other than putting people down?

Even the term 'swinging' conjures up images of 60's sexuality revolutionaries in floral shirts and flowers in their hair who believed back then that it could all be so simple and that if everyone just let down their hair and climbed out of their anal retentive ways, the whole world would be makin' lerv. It was not that these people were any more sad or empty than Mr & Mrs Jones with their stablility, 2.5 kids and well-mannered ways while parts of the world were going to hell. It's just that whatever side of the fence people were on, people wanted simple answers and everyone else to be just like them. It's really threatening when people are different. Sexuality, especially, is a real shock to the system when someone strongly feels differently to the way you do. Assaults, insults and all kinds of injuries abound from all fence-sides. Like it or not, sexuality is a deeply personal issue and some people are completely comfortable about it and some just aint and both positions are completely valid. It's when one party demands of a different party that they be 'like them' or invades vulnerability, or pushes people into something they are in no way ready for (be that committment in relationship or non-committal sex out of or in relationship)that the real 'evils' and injuries occur. I've come to believe that some people just should not marry for instance; it's just not 'their way' and there's plenty out there who would be perfectly matched as casual encounters or short-term relationships or companions without strict commitment to some ideal of love. It may not even be that no love exists for such people, it's just that they may have such a strong sense of themselves as individuals that a full-on committed relationship may make them feel engulfed and thwarted from different life-experiences. They may also be very capable of rowing their boat, alone, so to speak. It's really an individual matter. Some simply love the cosiness, comfort, warmth and vibe of a loving, close relationship and feel absolutely no need or desire for a ton of other experiences. Some people grow more in that environ and some are stifled. We're all different. and that's cool. Only fascism and fear dictates that there can only be one _right_ way to express sexuality. Self-honesty, inner strength, reflection and self-respect as well as respect for other are what is really necessary to have the courage to walk the path that truly suits you, keeping in mind, there's consequences to every action.

 

[ca3799]

"do have to ask what is the value of declaring swingers particularly as sad, empty, lonely, and searching for something? It's one of those statements that is literally true, but what of it? I am attracted to swinging (or, at least I was; I haven't done it in years) because there were things there that I wanted, and it made me happier. One might as well describe people who want to go to college as "ignorant, uneducated," or people who are looking for jobs as "unemployed, layabout, deadbeat" or people who go to the hospital as "diseased, injured, unhealthy" but what is really the value, other than putting people down?"

You are exactly right- I thought about that some over the weekend. I think the answer is in two things. The roomate was one of the worst roomies I ever had. He had pretty much every quality I don't like in a person, so certainly my overall view is colored some by my feeling about him.

I was also wondering if the documentary I saw had a slant that left me feeling sad for the people involved and I think it did. The two lasting impressions I had from the doc was death of the one man's wife (it happened before the doc's timeframe) and the sad couple mentioned above. I believe that interview with the couple was the last scene in the show also, and could have left the impression I have.

 

[epepke]

Even the term 'swinging' conjures up images of 60's sexuality revolutionaries in floral shirts and flowers in their hair who believed back then that it could all be so simple and that if everyone just let down their hair and climbed out of their anal retentive ways, the whole world would be makin' lerv.

That comes across as clear and honest. Especially as "swinging" is not an autonym; it's more like "freak" and "queer" and "geek."

Unfortunately, I've always thought that the autonym of "the lifestyle" was a bit pompous; the term "lifestyle" suggests to me things like when you get up in the morning and whether you have Special K or Jimmy Deans Sausage Cheese and Egg biscuits for breakfast.

It was not that these people were any more sad or empty than Mr & Mrs Jones with their stablility, 2.5 kids and well-mannered ways while parts of the world were going to hell. It's just that whatever side of the fence people were on, people wanted simple answers and everyone else to be just like them. It's really threatening when people are different. Sexuality, especially, is a real shock to the system when someone strongly feels differently to the way you do. Assaults, insults and all kinds of injuries abound from all fence-sides. Like it or not, sexuality is a deeply personal issue and some people are completely comfortable about it and some just aint and both positions are completely valid. It's when one party demands of a different party that they be 'like them' or invades vulnerability, or pushes people into something they are in no way ready for (be that committment in relationship or non-committal sex out of or in relationship)that the real 'evils' and injuries occur.

And who, exactly, is doing this? It is possible for most people to go through their lives completely ignorant of "swinging." Unless one actually goes and seeks out specialized publications, one can easily ignore it. It's not like "swingers" go from door to door with copies of "swinging" publications.

 

[Frankie]

Personally, I have no issues with the swinging scene or those that prescribe to such an activity. It is their choice to make, and not mine to judge.
It is one area I won't prescribe to, myself. Call me old fashioned, but I value loyalty and trust in a relationship very highly and believe in a single person relationship.

 

[Evolving_ant]

That comes across as clear and honest. Especially as "swinging" is not an autonym; it's more like "freak" and "queer" and "geek."

Unfortunately, I've always thought that the autonym of "the lifestyle" was a bit pompous; the term "lifestyle" suggests to me things like when you get up in the morning and whether you have Special K or Jimmy Deans Sausage Cheese and Egg biscuits for breakfast.



And who, exactly, is doing this? It is possible for most people to go through their lives completely ignorant of "swinging." Unless one actually goes and seeks out specialized publications, one can easily ignore it. It's not like "swingers" go from door to door with copies of "swinging" publications.

Sorry, Ive been away. I wasn't referring specifically to swingers but rather how people from all walks and ways of life can get pushy or judgemental about sexuality. But ok, you're entirely right. The swinging life-style as a communal event can be by-passed completely if one has no interest in it assuming one is not already somehow involved with another already into swinging by way of marriage, intimate relationship or friendship. And infact, I have been judged for not wanting to partake in swinging, for being 'repressed and uncomfortable with my sexuality'. My friends have come around now to understand that this was a pretty damn hurtful and destructive attitude as well as off the mark. I know this sort of thing has happened with other people too. Ye all swingers are not all saints albeit keep a low community profile

 

[hawkins_anderson]

I just wondered what most people's opinion is about sex outside of, or perhaps in addition to, marriage. We have been "swinging" for a number of years now. We tend to like playing with other couples and single females for adult fun. In our opinion, this is just recreational sex and is no different than water skiing. Why is it that some people find this so perverted?

Only speaking for myself here, but marriage is about a deep sense of commitment to one person. This person represents the best parts of that which you have created together in your union. This union is formed out of love. Swinging deals with recreational sex as you put it. Some people find it perverted because there is not sense of love or honor in it and if making love is created out of love itself then how can married people give away something so precious to perfect strangers?

 

[Xev]

Re: Re: The Swinging Lifestyle

Only speaking for myself here, but marriage is about a deep sense of commitment to one person. This person represents the best parts of that which you have created together in your union. This union is formed out of love. Swinging deals with recreational sex as you put it. Some people find it perverted because there is not sense of love or honor in it and if making love is created out of love itself then how can married people give away something so precious to perfect strangers?

Maybe they see it differently. They see sharing as sensual. They like watching the other person be pleased by someone else. Giving something away means making each other feel good by watching, not doing. Just my opinion. To each their own, as long as you're happy, blah blah blah. I'm sure there are monogamous people who have preferences that are viewed by others as perverted as well. But, that's a whole other thread.

Nice forum, by the way. Glad to be here.

Xev

 

[peptoabysmal]

I had a roomate once, a single guy, who was into swinging (and prostitutes). He invited everyone around to join him, but as far as I know, noone did.

Years later, I watched a documentary called "The Lifestyle" (available from Netflix) about, well, the lifestyle of swinging. The doc covered several couples and single folks over the course of one year. One guy (whose wife had died) had a special sling chair for intercourse, and the party hosters often put down padded mats in the bedrooms.

The combination of the one swinger I knew (that I know about) and the documentary leaves me feeing that swingers are, and I don't mean to insult, but sad, empty, lonely, searching for something- stuff like that. Neither the roomate or the people I saw in the doc seemed to be especially enjoying themselves in many areas of their lives. One of the couples interviewed described the damage they felt had occured to their marriage- I can still see their sad faces in my mind.
-
Obviously, I don't swing and am not interested in swinging. I guess I too am a person who has difficulty separating sexual intimacy from 'recreation'.

That's my opinion. Before the flaming, please remember you asked for my opinion.

I lived as an adult through the seventies and have known several people who have tried this lifestyle when it was all the rage. All of them I knew ended up feeling betrayed and lonely and divorced. All that high talk goes out the door when the other woman has a hot bod or the other guy has a big ****. (Of course now I've gone back to being a child, but that is another matter)

Is it just me or does it seem like predominately guys are in favor of swinging?

As for me, one woman is about all the trouble I can handle. And I do love to handle her...

 

[epepke]

And infact, I have been judged for not wanting to partake in swinging, for being 'repressed and uncomfortable with my sexuality'. My friends have come around now to understand that this was a pretty damn hurtful and destructive attitude as well as off the mark. I know this sort of thing has happened with other people too. Ye all swingers are not all saints albeit keep a low community profile

It's too bad that happened to you, and I'm glad they came around.

 

[epepke]

Is it just me or does it seem like predominately guys are in favor of swinging?

Swing clubs seem to be predominantly matriarchal.

 

[BigShoeStu]

I have posted a new thread call "The Polyamorous (Many Loves) Lifestyl". I wanted to post here, but I felt it was getting off the subject of swinging. Regardless, I would like to hear some of your opinions on this thread if any of you have something to add.

Yeah, like this forum wouldn't have anything to say.

 

[Ladyhawk]

Maybe I'm not into swinging coz I'm just lazy..

I mean, why go to all that effort to dress up, go to a club, mingle with a bunch of strangers, try to find someone that appeals to you, (especially when you may already have an ideal someone on your arm) so that you can gather in some room and swap partners or whatever ...when the end result is the same? The Big O. That's it. It's the same whether provoked by one person or twenty, right? Now, granted, women tend to be more multi-orgasmic than men (shorter recovery periods, et al) so you'd think swinging would appeal more to women. Instead, it seems to appeal more to men who don't have as short a recovery period so are probably more limited in their ability to enjoy the "variety" offered by swinging.

I'm not trying to sound naive here but doesn't it follow that an orgasm is an orgasm is an orgasm? No matter what is engaged in to produce it, isn't the end result still the same?

Swinging just seems, IMHO, to be a far too ballyhooed lifestyle that doesn't produce any more, sexually, than a monogamous lifestyle would/can.... It does seem to hold far more risks, though, in that the potential of losing someone who is significant to you is far greater. Yes, I agree that swinging "tests" jealousy but it also provokes it by exposing your SO to other partners who could conceivably turn their head...permanently. It's a risk you run and, again, if both partners are open to it, Edspeed to them. However, it's a great alternative for folks who are not, nor do not want, to be in any kind of monogamous or committed relationship. It certainly provides a nice alternative to going to the movies alone on another Saturday night..