I've been having an interesting conversation the past few days with a single gentleman on another web page dedicated to libertine sexual attitudes and connections. He has been trying, unsuccessfully I might add, to get me to "send" my wife to another state to engage in sexual activity with him.
Beyond the idea that this was a fairly ballsy move, imo (He overtly describes himself as "the consummate alpha male" and has presupposed that I, "allowing" my wife to engage in intimate relations with other men, am the exact opposite.), he seems utterly perplexed that I would not readily consider his offer even though I actually DID mention his proposal to Ms. Evil (She's always had full rein to accept or decline such offers/interactions entirely without my approval.) who simply did the HARDEST eye roll imaginable and pantomimed jerking off. LOL
After going back and forth quite a bit (Yes, I should probably have just dismissed him out of hand and stopped responding to his emails...but it WAS somewhat amusing and entertaining.), and listening to his numerous arguments as to why I/we should comply with this wishes he finally distilled his final argument down to, "It's just sex!".
The more I thought about it I knew he was right and swinging, at it's core, it IS just sex. But it also got me to wondering if it isn't indeed MORE than just sex. What IS swinging? Is it a high level of human physical interaction that transcends the rules of polite (religious?) society and even flaunts many human emotions like love and jealousy or is it, as his argument might suggest, simply using another human being as a de facto masturbatory aid?
So I thought I would throw this out to the forum to comment and discuss. Is swinging JUST sex or what other factors are important to the experience and integral in your decision to fuck someone else?
Beyond the idea that this was a fairly ballsy move, imo (He overtly describes himself as "the consummate alpha male" and has presupposed that I, "allowing" my wife to engage in intimate relations with other men, am the exact opposite.), he seems utterly perplexed that I would not readily consider his offer even though I actually DID mention his proposal to Ms. Evil (She's always had full rein to accept or decline such offers/interactions entirely without my approval.) who simply did the HARDEST eye roll imaginable and pantomimed jerking off. LOL
After going back and forth quite a bit (Yes, I should probably have just dismissed him out of hand and stopped responding to his emails...but it WAS somewhat amusing and entertaining.), and listening to his numerous arguments as to why I/we should comply with this wishes he finally distilled his final argument down to, "It's just sex!".
The more I thought about it I knew he was right and swinging, at it's core, it IS just sex. But it also got me to wondering if it isn't indeed MORE than just sex. What IS swinging? Is it a high level of human physical interaction that transcends the rules of polite (religious?) society and even flaunts many human emotions like love and jealousy or is it, as his argument might suggest, simply using another human being as a de facto masturbatory aid?
So I thought I would throw this out to the forum to comment and discuss. Is swinging JUST sex or what other factors are important to the experience and integral in your decision to fuck someone else?
Like most of the rest society, there is a certain level of propaganda, rhetoric, dogma, so on and so forth, to be found in any and all of the non-monogamous, "sexually liberated" communities. People will try and tell us what it is, and what it isn't, when in fact there are countless variations on the themes. It seems in most every social circles, those who seem to be the "rule makers" are also those who wish to be in control, for self serving reasons. The dude on the other site, is trying to convince you, as if Mrs. Evil is your property, to let him use your property. He is trying to shame you into let him take control of what he deems property. He may be an "alpha male" that rarely ever gets laid. There are some couples that enjoy a fetish, where one of them actually enjoys being treated as property, and maybe that is a subset of the fetish community he is familiar with. If so, then the women he plays with may just love that sort of treatment, and he can't understand why you two don't?
What is swinging? That's a really broad question. It might be just sex for some. It might be a door to self actualization for others. For some it might be the road to self destruction. It could be all sorts of levels below, in the middle, or beyond for others.
What is swinging? That's a really broad question. It might be just sex for some. It might be a door to self actualization for others. For some it might be the road to self destruction. It could be all sorts of levels below, in the middle, or beyond for others.
DELICIOUSLYWET wrote:
Like most of the rest society, there is a certain level of propaganda, rhetoric, dogma, so on and so forth, to be found in any and all of the non-monogamous, "sexually liberated" communities. People will try and tell us what it is, and what it isn't, when in fact there are countless variations on the themes. It seems in most every social circles, those who seem to be the "rule makers" are also those who wish to be in control, for self serving reasons. The dude on the other site, is trying to convince you, as if Mrs. Evil is your property, to let him use your property. He is trying to shame you into let him take control of what he deems property. He may be an "alpha male" that rarely ever gets laid. There are some couples that enjoy a fetish, where one of them actually enjoys being treated as property, and maybe that is a subset of the fetish community he is familiar with. If so, then the women he plays with may just love that sort of treatment, and he can't understand why you two don't?
What is swinging? That's a really broad question. It might be just sex for some. It might be a door to self actualization for others. For some it might be the road to self destruction. It could be all sorts of levels below, in the middle, or beyond for others.
I'm fairly certain that to my TBM mother swinging is literally the Highway to Hell.
EVILDOERS wrote:
I've been having an interesting conversation the past few days with a single gentleman on another web page dedicated to libertine sexual attitudes and connections. He has been trying, unsuccessfully I might add, to get me to "send" my wife to another state to engage in sexual activity with him.
Beyond the idea that this was a fairly ballsy move, imo (He overtly describes himself as "the consummate alpha male" and has presupposed that I, "allowing" my wife to engage in intimate relations with other men, am the exact opposite.), he seems utterly perplexed that I would not readily consider his offer even though I actually DID mention his proposal to Ms. Evil (She's always had full rein to accept or decline such offers/interactions entirely without my approval.) who simply did the HARDEST eye roll imaginable and pantomimed jerking off. LOL
After going back and forth quite a bit (Yes, I should probably have just dismissed him out of hand and stopped responding to his emails...but it WAS somewhat amusing and entertaining.), and listening to his numerous arguments as to why I/we should comply with this wishes he finally distilled his final argument down to, "It's just sex!".
The more I thought about it I knew he was right and swinging, at it's core, it IS just sex. But it also got me to wondering if it isn't indeed MORE than just sex. What IS swinging? Is it a high level of human physical interaction that transcends the rules of polite (religious?) society and even flaunts many human emotions like love and jealousy or is it, as his argument might suggest, simply using another human being as a de facto masturbatory aid?
So I thought I would throw this out to the forum to comment and discuss. Is swinging JUST sex or what other factors are important to the experience and integral in your decision to fuck someone else?
You told me it was BIBLE STUDY!!!!
It’s the sharing and experience with the another partner without the fear of being judged by someone else’s morality. There are a lot of people on this site that just want the sex with no strings attached and that’s great. Others want a relationship of friends with benefits and many just want to look and maybe interact at a distance with no intention of sharing. One of the great things about the lifestyle is how it is defined to fit each persons perspective. If those perspectives collide in a way that does fit an expectation then it is probably not very much fun.
Our morality and attitude holds us back in many cases from realizing the full satisfaction of what swinging should be. A friend once told me that the human species was not meant to be monogamous and monogamy was a way to control behavior to meet a standard set by others.
All I can say is I am glad my spouse and I broke free of the constraints and can enjoy others in the lifestyle without moral guilt.
Our morality and attitude holds us back in many cases from realizing the full satisfaction of what swinging should be. A friend once told me that the human species was not meant to be monogamous and monogamy was a way to control behavior to meet a standard set by others.
All I can say is I am glad my spouse and I broke free of the constraints and can enjoy others in the lifestyle without moral guilt.
If we decide to go eat Korean food, it does not make us Koreans. If we really enjoyed our meal, it does not mean we won't ever decide to eat Italian, or Mexican or Chinese food. It is a choice we made. If we decide to play with a couple, pretty much only interested in hot sex, it does not mean we are shallow. It was a choice we all made and not a defining moment. It does not mean we are unwilling to become best friends with couples, or singles we meet through our lifestyle activities. Sexual desire changes and is a bit fluid throughout the course of our lives. It isn't always rational. Sexual desire can fall somewhat outside the parameters of our typical behavior. Most men and women probably hope to have a great deal of control over their lives and choices, yet some might choose to be sexually submissive, and really enjoy it. There are people who prefer polite behavior or that perhaps don't use profanity, that want to be called profane names in the bedroom. There are women and men that keep there homes, cars, attire, spotless, that most think of as near germaphobes, that dream about golden showers. Desire ain't always rational. Or, maybe rationality ain't always desirable?
We are here for just a fuck ...
What is Swinging? THAT, indeed, is a wonderfully thought-provoking question that practically begs to be answered, argued, and discussed. By way of full disclosure – this response is being written by Mr. Sweet.
Let me say, up front, that I fully expect some to disagree with some or all of my response - I’m OK with that.
To us, ‘swinging’ is the act of connecting with other people. Each of us in the LS connect at different levels – or we define these connections differently. Some would describe their connection desires as ‘full’ others as ‘soft’. Some people describe their connection desires as ‘bi’, some as ‘FWB’, etc. what all of us attempt to do is to describe a level of connectivity that we are seeking. What makes it beautiful is that there appears to be plenty of others in the LS who are seeking the same thing. Participation on a LS website is part of the ‘how’ we engage in the process of making these connections. That’s my short answer.
I always say – why only use 75 words to say something when 7500 will do?? A word of warning to those who continue reading – I have severe ADHD (no that is not sexually transmitted . . . LOL), and when I chase the proverbial squirrel . . . I follow it right down the fucking rabbit hole and into the 1500 other tunnels it leads to. So – for those of you not truly interested in the deeper discussion . . . you should just move on to the next response. This next section is a continuation of the stream of consciousness demonstrative of where my mind goes when asked a thought-provoking question. The rest of this post may or may not be related to the original question – it’s just the first hole my ADHD brain jumped into. For those of you who like going down rabbit holes – or who crave cerebral connectivity . . . even when it’s done poorly . . . keep reading . . . but you have been warned!
I don’t share the same negative view many have expressed, on this site and elsewhere, that religion’s primary purpose is to control people. I actually hold a kinder and gentler and (to me) a more beautiful perspective on what religious doctrines (nearly all of them) have tried to do, or what they are designed to do. That they have done so poorly, at times, is more a reflection of humanity’s short comings than it is a statement about the coercive nature of the belief system or doctrines themselves.
At its core, I believe that religions have always attempted to help people be or become their ‘best self’. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, this included a set of instructions or ‘commandments’ intended to help us be less selfish and more selfless. ‘Thou shalt not steal’ says the doctrine . . . because if we steal, we exercise the most selfish part of our soul by insisting that we need something more than the person we are taking it from. ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery’ the good books say. To us, this means not hurting others in the pursuit of a sexual liaison – it was never intended to be interpreted as ‘thou shalt not have sexual relations with anyone else’ – those are social constructs and interpretations of the original doctrine made by seriously flawed individuals (IMHO).
Pre-Christian Jews had reduced these laws to ridiculous interpretations so far removed from their original intent that they became silly – I mean who could ever logically conclude that the doctrine of having a ‘day of rest’ should be construed to mean how many steps one takes on the Sabbath? Yet – that is precisely what many humans did. Humans today are no different – they continue to attempt to use belief systems as weapons of war to apply control, elevate how they feel about themselves by pointing out their pious bigotry and public compliance with their self-defined moral application of self-ascribed understanding. These are the modern-day Pharisees and Sadducees.
I believe these people are what nearly all of us in the LS have learned to hate about religion. That hate, however, is misdirected at the belief systems – the doctrines (if you will) instead of at those who interpolate the doctrine’s essence.
Metaphorically, it is not at all dissimilar to a piano teacher who teaches the scales. You really cannot learn to play any musical instrument without learning the scales and the notes on the scale. Having said that . . . some teachers never move beyond the scales and would have us believe that the scales equate to beautiful music. A good teacher uses those scales while making clear that this practice holds the promise of great music. As soon as possible, the effective teacher introduces the student to Billy Joel, Elton John, and in time Beethoven and Mozart. We can be angry at teachers and even fellow students who insist we stick to the scales . . . but it won’t help. I believe we should pity those people instead . . . for they have simply not understood that the only real purpose of these scales (rules, commandments, doctrines) is to help us learn to play and enjoy beautiful music.
To me, the beauty I find in the LS – is that I hear ‘the music’. It is beautiful to me, to us, to our couple-hood. Now, in the Judeo-Christian tradition – the only two real commandments (or at least ‘the greatest’ of them) are to love God and to love others. What better way to love others than to share our bodies, our minds, our sensuality with them?? When I was younger and got a new bike for my birthday – I wanted my friends to take it for a spin. Isn’t that the essence of being UN-selfish? We want our true friends to share with us our best experiences. Now – I always wanted my bike back after lending it to a friend – and maybe that is a really bad metaphor as relating to swinging because it implies ownership of an object – that’s not at all what I mean . . . it’s just that in the LS – we share our bodies and our partner’s bodies with others in hopes of elevating them . . . of giving each other a new piece of music to play with so to speak. How is that not beautiful? I haven’t met anyone in the LS yet who wanted to share their partner in hopes of getting rid of them and taking the other person’s partner away from them. Its not that there is not risk of that ever happening . . . but that certainly is not the intent of anyone I know in the LS. The intent is always to share something beautiful. There is nothing ugly or demeaning about that. Those of us in this LS . . . we are practicing the very essence of the command ‘love others’. (IMHO).
While many of us will undoubtedly make mistakes as we pursue these new connections – so too do musicians hit many sour or wrong notes when learning a new piece of music – we have to give ourselves and others permission to hit those sour notes in pursuit of their beautiful music. I am not bothered by the poor souls who are still bound by society’s ‘scales’ – because we all had to learn them ourselves. In my experience, I love the people in the LS because they play at a higher level – they hear this beautiful music and have embraced it . . . and they want more of it. The music of connectivity is what swinging means to me. Then again . . . I’m often wrong, but never unsure (wink).
Thanks for asking the question ‘EvilDoers’ – I enjoyed the internal discussion and thought process and I have enjoyed reading your responses. THAT is what WE love about Swingular – the forums!!! Hopefully nobody but me read this to the end – too damn long! That’s what happens when feeble minds have too much time on their hands while sitting at airports – they start thinking too much!
Let me say, up front, that I fully expect some to disagree with some or all of my response - I’m OK with that.
To us, ‘swinging’ is the act of connecting with other people. Each of us in the LS connect at different levels – or we define these connections differently. Some would describe their connection desires as ‘full’ others as ‘soft’. Some people describe their connection desires as ‘bi’, some as ‘FWB’, etc. what all of us attempt to do is to describe a level of connectivity that we are seeking. What makes it beautiful is that there appears to be plenty of others in the LS who are seeking the same thing. Participation on a LS website is part of the ‘how’ we engage in the process of making these connections. That’s my short answer.
I always say – why only use 75 words to say something when 7500 will do?? A word of warning to those who continue reading – I have severe ADHD (no that is not sexually transmitted . . . LOL), and when I chase the proverbial squirrel . . . I follow it right down the fucking rabbit hole and into the 1500 other tunnels it leads to. So – for those of you not truly interested in the deeper discussion . . . you should just move on to the next response. This next section is a continuation of the stream of consciousness demonstrative of where my mind goes when asked a thought-provoking question. The rest of this post may or may not be related to the original question – it’s just the first hole my ADHD brain jumped into. For those of you who like going down rabbit holes – or who crave cerebral connectivity . . . even when it’s done poorly . . . keep reading . . . but you have been warned!
I don’t share the same negative view many have expressed, on this site and elsewhere, that religion’s primary purpose is to control people. I actually hold a kinder and gentler and (to me) a more beautiful perspective on what religious doctrines (nearly all of them) have tried to do, or what they are designed to do. That they have done so poorly, at times, is more a reflection of humanity’s short comings than it is a statement about the coercive nature of the belief system or doctrines themselves.
At its core, I believe that religions have always attempted to help people be or become their ‘best self’. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, this included a set of instructions or ‘commandments’ intended to help us be less selfish and more selfless. ‘Thou shalt not steal’ says the doctrine . . . because if we steal, we exercise the most selfish part of our soul by insisting that we need something more than the person we are taking it from. ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery’ the good books say. To us, this means not hurting others in the pursuit of a sexual liaison – it was never intended to be interpreted as ‘thou shalt not have sexual relations with anyone else’ – those are social constructs and interpretations of the original doctrine made by seriously flawed individuals (IMHO).
Pre-Christian Jews had reduced these laws to ridiculous interpretations so far removed from their original intent that they became silly – I mean who could ever logically conclude that the doctrine of having a ‘day of rest’ should be construed to mean how many steps one takes on the Sabbath? Yet – that is precisely what many humans did. Humans today are no different – they continue to attempt to use belief systems as weapons of war to apply control, elevate how they feel about themselves by pointing out their pious bigotry and public compliance with their self-defined moral application of self-ascribed understanding. These are the modern-day Pharisees and Sadducees.
I believe these people are what nearly all of us in the LS have learned to hate about religion. That hate, however, is misdirected at the belief systems – the doctrines (if you will) instead of at those who interpolate the doctrine’s essence.
Metaphorically, it is not at all dissimilar to a piano teacher who teaches the scales. You really cannot learn to play any musical instrument without learning the scales and the notes on the scale. Having said that . . . some teachers never move beyond the scales and would have us believe that the scales equate to beautiful music. A good teacher uses those scales while making clear that this practice holds the promise of great music. As soon as possible, the effective teacher introduces the student to Billy Joel, Elton John, and in time Beethoven and Mozart. We can be angry at teachers and even fellow students who insist we stick to the scales . . . but it won’t help. I believe we should pity those people instead . . . for they have simply not understood that the only real purpose of these scales (rules, commandments, doctrines) is to help us learn to play and enjoy beautiful music.
To me, the beauty I find in the LS – is that I hear ‘the music’. It is beautiful to me, to us, to our couple-hood. Now, in the Judeo-Christian tradition – the only two real commandments (or at least ‘the greatest’ of them) are to love God and to love others. What better way to love others than to share our bodies, our minds, our sensuality with them?? When I was younger and got a new bike for my birthday – I wanted my friends to take it for a spin. Isn’t that the essence of being UN-selfish? We want our true friends to share with us our best experiences. Now – I always wanted my bike back after lending it to a friend – and maybe that is a really bad metaphor as relating to swinging because it implies ownership of an object – that’s not at all what I mean . . . it’s just that in the LS – we share our bodies and our partner’s bodies with others in hopes of elevating them . . . of giving each other a new piece of music to play with so to speak. How is that not beautiful? I haven’t met anyone in the LS yet who wanted to share their partner in hopes of getting rid of them and taking the other person’s partner away from them. Its not that there is not risk of that ever happening . . . but that certainly is not the intent of anyone I know in the LS. The intent is always to share something beautiful. There is nothing ugly or demeaning about that. Those of us in this LS . . . we are practicing the very essence of the command ‘love others’. (IMHO).
While many of us will undoubtedly make mistakes as we pursue these new connections – so too do musicians hit many sour or wrong notes when learning a new piece of music – we have to give ourselves and others permission to hit those sour notes in pursuit of their beautiful music. I am not bothered by the poor souls who are still bound by society’s ‘scales’ – because we all had to learn them ourselves. In my experience, I love the people in the LS because they play at a higher level – they hear this beautiful music and have embraced it . . . and they want more of it. The music of connectivity is what swinging means to me. Then again . . . I’m often wrong, but never unsure (wink).
Thanks for asking the question ‘EvilDoers’ – I enjoyed the internal discussion and thought process and I have enjoyed reading your responses. THAT is what WE love about Swingular – the forums!!! Hopefully nobody but me read this to the end – too damn long! That’s what happens when feeble minds have too much time on their hands while sitting at airports – they start thinking too much!
It seems to me that your interlocutor had a few statements wrong.
"Alpha male." My axiom is if you have to say it, it isn't so.
"It's just sex." "It's" should be I'm. "Just" should be "only a." "Sex" should be "genital." So we have "I'm only a genital." And even that is not correct because most apes like to play with genitals. So take it back down to crude and crass language, "I'm only a dick." And you have something close to the truth, in the sense that a dick is a generally unpleasant person who believes the entirety of existence exists only to serve them.
As to the question is it "just sex?" Yes, in that sex has not been defined. So what is sex? Presuming we mean the act of sexual intercourse, to what end? An orgasm? If that's what you want, why do you need a partner at all, let alone have a desire to experience a different one? At least two species of apes outside our own use sex to re-enforce social connections. And this might just help to explain why people in the community tend to play within a particular "click." As well as the phenomenon of swinging.
"Alpha male." My axiom is if you have to say it, it isn't so.
"It's just sex." "It's" should be I'm. "Just" should be "only a." "Sex" should be "genital." So we have "I'm only a genital." And even that is not correct because most apes like to play with genitals. So take it back down to crude and crass language, "I'm only a dick." And you have something close to the truth, in the sense that a dick is a generally unpleasant person who believes the entirety of existence exists only to serve them.
As to the question is it "just sex?" Yes, in that sex has not been defined. So what is sex? Presuming we mean the act of sexual intercourse, to what end? An orgasm? If that's what you want, why do you need a partner at all, let alone have a desire to experience a different one? At least two species of apes outside our own use sex to re-enforce social connections. And this might just help to explain why people in the community tend to play within a particular "click." As well as the phenomenon of swinging.
It’s just sex. All else is a social construct created by religion to control people. It’s that simple to us.
I think, to a point, it is whatever the involved players want it to be. Still, even when it is just sex there are more emotions involved than some want to admit, or maybe they don't recognize. Someones conscious decision to be used because "its just sex" becomes something that stirs emotions from being in that situation. "Just sex" is a relative comment that can mean many things.
It's not just sex. I can't just fuck someone I have no connection with
It's more than sex a lot of what it is, is the chase and the catching. The attraction and the animalistic willingness to fuck someone you don't really know.
-A
It's more than sex a lot of what it is, is the chase and the catching. The attraction and the animalistic willingness to fuck someone you don't really know.
-A
Different reasons aplenty Im sure. We love sex, but at the same time, we’ve had our entire marriage to learn each other and how to please each other best, so no “encounter” is going to be more physically pleasing than what we can do ourselves. The draw for us, is the flirting, learning about the person(s), the newness of the personalities, new and different naughty bits lol. For us it is a perk, a fantastic sex life as is, but I love knowing that there are others who want and desire my wife and what it can do for her self image, but also that she can have that and still be happy and content with our marriage. Win win.