Quote:
Originally Posted by curious_jorge  I'm fairly new to all of this, so I want to learn all I can about the lifestyle. However, my thing is this: I know that swinging is not the perverted sexual free-for-all like some try to make it seem like and yes that is an effed up stereotype. However, when swingers discriminate against single men by assuming that he's in it just for to bang some guy's wife or any of the other preconceived notions, isn't that the same thing? Not trying to cause trouble, just wondering. |
Curious Jorge,
Well... the answer is enclosed in the questions you
didn't ask... which already would ban you from our options.
It's true, there are couples who'd look for singles to "use" just once, wildly and so forth, and are able to manage things by themselves when something goes wrong, as stated in a previous post. Most of them would look for someone up to bang the wife... but when banning a single, it wouldn't be because of this!
When you play as a couple, let say with a single man, you're bringing something he isn't capable of... and no, I don't mean a woman, I mean your relationship. In order to be able to play, a couple need to take care of each other, and also to take care of the relationship itself, protecting it from whatever may harm it. So, besides protecting the involved people (each one of them) they have to protect something else, while the single player just need to protect himself.
So the problem isn't the single's moral take about swinging, but the way he valuates those other people's good called the relationship, and his perception of the meaning of those rules the couple set up beforehand to protect it. Because it isn't about the rule as it was explicited, but the spirit the rule pursues, that it is way more likely another swinger couple already know but a single pretty often is not even aware of.
As to ensure a single could be aware of this, this single would have to have a previous experience from a relationship, and moveover one where they swung and risked the same goods. It isn't even a matter of the single's good will, cause even a well intended single could harm them unintendedly.
In fact what's required from the single is a good dose of common sense, however the problem is, how to tell appart those having it from those who doesn't have it? Moreover when many who doesn't already learned a "politicaly right" speech to improve their chances to score.
So, it is even worst than what you're thinking. After being prescreened to get to know your "moral take", you'll be toroughly tested to find out if you're being just "politically right", or you have a clue of what you're talking about. One part of this test is "let's see how this guy takes rejection, even if arbitrary"... because many of the couple's rules devised to protect their relationship will be arbitrary for everyone else but them (and this is something obvious for any otrhe couple as to attempt to argue).
So, you want to learn and this is nice from you, but from my perspective, the sole fact that you're asking this question (moreover when you missed big time the real issue here) allows me to question wheter you have a clue of what we'd be risking as a couple or not, wheter you'd be aware of our rule's spirit or not. And since the risk is exclusively ours, and it is so high due to the value of goods involved (already ours, and none of them yours)... I'd chose to ban you, preventively.
Now, this is an example of the way we think of the whole "single's problem". From our experience going out every weekend to our swinger's club for 5 years, is that just FOUR guys from the thousands we've seen around there, seems to be safe players (and two of them were married and swingers by then).
Many singles whin at this argument since at first glance we're depriving them from something to learn as to be able to play with us, something we know and they don't as if we were unfairly keeping THE secret from them. Well, we've spent a lot of time developing our relationship to the point we was able to think of swinging, and then we've spent a lot of time and effort on getting to know each other limits and what's risky to our relationship, and honestly, I am not keen to the idea of spending our time (a LOT of time) teaching all of this to a single who just wants to enjoy the party... and this IF I were able to teach something people learn from their personal experience, IF they ever learn what's required from it.
Because of this many of us claim most singles aren't swingers, even if playing the swinger's game. Singles can enjoy recreational sex without having to impose any limit to themselves, while swingers enjoy recreational sex imposing several limits for themselves and their playmates. So, it isn't that much about recreational sex (as you stated) but about being aware of and up to honor other people's limits.
And notice this reason also applies to couples who want to swing without having the same grounds (like, couple wanting to swing to save an already spoiled marriage, or just... kamikazes) which imposes even a higher risk for themselves than the ones they impose to us. No one complain about couples discriminating other couples on these grounds. But many singles complain about couples discriminating them on the very same grounds, under the assumption we're making an "stereotype" for the lack of experience and requirements a couple would have... because they're singles. More than a stereotype, this is a mere definition.
So, yep. If you want to play, you'll have to prove you're able to do this, and this takes time and effort.