Lifestyle Nightmare: Where Were the Hosts?

[Uomo]

My wife and I attended our first lifestyle event last night

We were soooo disappointed ... as were many others, I am certian.

We're not giving up on the lifestlye quite yet ... I want to believe what we experienced was the exception (to the rule). I need some insight from some of the veteran swingers:

We went to on off-site event in East Winsdor CT (Unique Diversions). On your (collective) advice, we arrived without any expectations, beyond having a good time. It was VERY good advice. My wife and I spent most of the evening dancing and talking with each other (we had fun) ... but that was about it. When the evening was over, I NOT dissappointed we didn't hook it up sexually (although it might have been nice) ... I was dissappointed that the event was so poorly run that our returning a second time ... would (quite frankly) be a waste of our time. We will NEVER go back. Here's why (and five suggestions for improvement):

1) NO MOVEMENT: Everybody sat down at tables spread out across the ballroom and hardly anybody moved from their seats. Whatever table a person sat at when they arrived ... that's where they were at the end of the night (no one was standing). I'd say that observation was accurate for about 90 percent of the crowd. I don't get it. I did not pay $75 to sit on my ass ... I want to move around and mingle with a crowd (think: cocktail party). I felt like I was at a wedding reception (or senior center) with some very bored relatives. Or here's another idea: put the bar on one side of the room and the buffet table on the other (i.e. give me a reason to cross the room if I am sitting on the side of the bar). Party 101. SUGGESTION NUMBER ONE: Spread out the refreshments and get rid of the tables.

2) NO HOSTS: When the new couples arrived, they were given a wrist band ... and that's was it. The hosts made absolutely no effort to get to know you, introduce you to the regulars ... or even to introduce you to other newcomers. It was an embarrassment. The "regulars" all grouped together at a few tables (seating 10 to a table) and the newcomers ... were pretty much left in the cold; most sat at empty tables (of 10) by themselves, or with one other couple (not moving). If the tables sat two or four to a table, I could have overcome this logistical oversight on my own (I'm not a shy person or hesistant to introduce); but my wife and I not going to crash a table of 10 regulars uninvited ... that's VERY awkward. A table of 10 might not have been so bad had the hosts introduced us to a member of the group who (in turn) might have invited us over (at which point, group introductions would have been simple) ... but let's be realistic: NO newcomer is going to spontaniously crash a table of 10 uninvited. The result? We newcomers felt like we were on the outside of someone else's party looking in -- and that's EXACTLY what it was. SUGGESTION NUMBER TWO: Make your guests feel comfortable by getting to know them and making some initial introductions (what a concept!). SUGGESTION NUMBER THREE: If you inisist on having tables (which I absolutely abhor), don't seat more than four to a table (so as to promote movement -- even among regulars) or ... (if tables of 10 are inevitable) don't set up more seats than you can fill (i.e make sure ALL of your guests sit at a full table).

3) NO ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES: I like to dance. When I go to dance lessons at Arthur Murray, we start off with one partner, dance for a while, then (on the instructor's cue) rotate to the next. It is an very easy way to get to know other people and break the ice. Did Anything like that happen at Unique Diversions? No. Everybody danced with their wives, returned to their tables, and danced with their wives again. Am I missing something? How hard is it to do something as simple as: let's get the ladies on one side of the floor, the guys on the other, pair off with someone new, and rotate? Not everyone need participate ... but for those of us who don't know anybody (and want to) ... we we're dying for something like this to happen. It never did. Or how about ladies choice? Or how about numbering each table, give people random table assignments and then have everybody rotate tables every half-hour? Something ... anything ... (nope): nothing. And here's another news flash: If I am a guy interested in going one on one with another guy's wife ... I don't necessarily want to introduce myself to the women with the guy sitting there giving me the evil eye ... and maybe she like a little space herself. Maybe we would be more comfortable meeting up for the first time on the dance floor (or by way or some other activity) apart from our respective spouses. I'm a very good looking guy. If I can get some one-on-one time with Mrs. Right Now, we will probably hit it off (in which case, Mrs. Right-Now will likely give her hubby a royal ass chewing if he attempts a double-standard). In other words: you have to find ways to break the couples up. It's not going to happen on its own. I'm not going to leave my wife all alone at a table by herself while I go on the prowl looking for someone's wife (another argument for scrapping tables). And if the wives are glued to their husbands' sides ... it can frustrate an otherwise good time. SUGGESTION NUMBER FOUR: Organize a series of group activities (or rotating seating plans) to make sure your guests are meeting new people, uninhibited and having fun.

4) LOUSY DANCE SET-UP: The dance floor was too big and the music too fast. If I am planning on getting intimate with some unfamiliar person (or anyone for that matter) ... why do I want to be breaking a sweat on the dance floor, tearing it up to up-tempo work-out music? News-Flash: Sweaty guys on the dance floor is NOT a turn-on (and vice versa)! Sensual music: Good. Slow dancing: Very Good. Bubble-Pop-Electric: Dead-on-arrivial. Here's another FYI: Most guys don't want to ask a girl out onto the dance floor for the first time to an up-tempo song. It's a fact: we are better at slow dances than fast. The music was way too fast for most of the evening. It should should have been the reverse. And as far as the dance floor goes (at a swinger party): less is more (the smaller -- the better) If the dance floor is too big for the typical crowd occupying the floor ... human nature, being what it is, everyone will spread themselves out in relative proportion (and that's exactly what happened). If the dance floor is small, you can move in close, brush up against, etc. etc. and nobody feels afronted. We aren't really here to dance, are we? There was a good ten feet seperating each of the dancers. In that context, I did not feel comfortable moving in on another person's space (and neither did anyone else, it appeared). That's not good. At this event, we were renting a hotel conference center. Granted, the hosts could not simply tear up the floor ... but they could have set up tables on part of it (or otherwise blocked it off); in other words: they could have made it smaller. They did not. In fact: the conference room was itself too big (think intimate settings: not a football field for 80). A room half that size would have been much, much better. Again: less is more. I'm at a lifestyle event: I don't want my space! SUGGESTION NUMBER FIVE: Play slow or medium-tempo sensual music (keep your guests smelling shower fresh), and keep the spaces (and dance floor) small.

So ... what's the concensus? Is what I expereinced a typical night at a typical lifestyle event ... or did I simply go to an event that was very poorly run and not too well-thought out?

I'd like to think (just as I would not stop going to restaurants because I have one bad night out) that this was the exception to the rule. But I'm not looking for encouragement. Just honesty.

I'm reminded of something former Disney CEO Michael Eisner once said: The problem with success is that it tends to make you forget what is was that made you successful in the first place. I think that's what happened here.

I'm going to another lifesytle event in a few weeks ... but it won't be with this group. The evening wasn't a disappointment ... the organization was.

[Spoomonkey]

The set up you describe sounds pretty bad. A club/party has to have some flow to it - a reason for people to move around and mingle. We hardly sit down ourselves on club night.

We went to a club with some friends (Mr and Mrs Good Times from here on the board) and there was a lot more sitting than we were used to. So much so, that I ended up kind of standing by the table most of the night. I tend to be pretty energetic and sitting is hard for me - unless I am at home, in which case, sitting on my ass is a given

It is hard to discuss music, because what your idea of up-tempo is might be pretty sensual to others. But, I will say, I enjoy fast dancing and consider myself better at that than slow - not that I am all that good at either - I just find faster dancing is more fun for my female partners, and that is why I dance.

I do disagree with this part, though:

Originally Posted by Uomo

In other words: you have to find ways to break the couples up. It's not going to happen on its own.

For most folks, swinging is a couples thing. We "prowl" - as you put it - together. In our club, we are very comfortable, know lot of folks and get into our own conversations. But when we are looking, we are together.

I respect men who can come up and talk to me - guys who wait until I have wandered off to approach Mrs Spoomonkey are immediately nixed off of our list of potentials. First, they give us the "can't be trusted" vibe - and second, it seems a little cowardly.

It may be your thing to prowl and play seperate, but most couples do those things together.

Choreographing opportunities for you to dance with, talk to, connect with someone new seems very... Junior high...

While a better set up might have made it more friendly, the responsibility to say hi to someone is yours, not the host's.

Spoomonkey

[Pepper & Drew]

To me, it sounds like your perception of what an off-premises party is was a little off.

Originally Posted by Uomo

1) NO MOVEMENT: Everybody sat down at tables spread out across the ballroom and hardly anybody moved from their seats. Whatever table a person sat at when they arrived ... that's where they were at the end of the night (no one was standing). I'd say that observation was accurate for about 90 percent of the crowd. I don't get it. I did not pay $75 to sit on my ass ... I want to move around and mingle with a crowd.....Party 101. SUGGESTION NUMBER ONE: Spread out the refreshments and get rid of the tables.

If you didn't want to sit on your ass, you could certainly mingle. I agree that some set-ups are more conducive to mingling than others, but we've been to socials in the same room and one night everyone's mingling, and another night most people are glued to their chairs.

2) NO HOSTS: When the new couples arrived, they were given a wrist band ... and that's was it. The hosts made absolutely no effort to get to know you, introduce you to the regulars ... or even to introduce you to other newcomers. It was an embarrassment. The "regulars" all grouped together at a few tables (seating 10 to a table) and the newcomers ... were pretty much left in the cold; most sat at empty tables (of 10) by themselves, or with one other couple (not moving). If the tables sat two or four to a table, I could have overcome this logistical oversight on my own (I'm not a shy person or hesistant to introduce); but my wife and I not going to crash a table of 10 regulars uninvited ... that's VERY awkward. A table of 10 might not have been so bad had the hosts introduced us to a member of the group who (in turn) might have invited us over (at which point, group introductions would have been simple) ... but let's be realistic: NO newcomer is going to spontaniously crash a table of 10 uninvited. The result? We newcomers felt like we were on the outside of someone else's party looking in -- and that's EXACTLY what it was. SUGGESTION NUMBER TWO: Make your guests feel comfortable by getting to know them and making some initial introductions (what a concept!). SUGGESTION NUMBER THREE: If you inisist on having tables (which I absolutely abhor), don't seat more than four to a table (so as to promote movement -- even among regulars) or ... (if tables of 10 are inevitable) don't set up more seats than you can fill (i.e make sure ALL of your guests sit at a full table).

Was there a newbie info session advertised or was this just general admission? If it were the regular admission time, I don't see how the host would have time to lead you and each new couple by the hand to introduce you to people. And, don't set up more seats than you can fill? How would the host know that before the party? Besides that, if I paid $75 bucks, you're not going to tell me that I MUST sit at X table so that the table will be full.

3) NO ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES: How hard is it to do something as simple as: let's get the ladies on one side of the floor, the guys on the other, pair off with someone new, and rotate? Not everyone need participate ... but for those of us who don't know anybody (and want to) ... we we're dying for something like this to happen. It never did. Or how about ladies choice? Or how about numbering each table, give people random table assignments and then have everybody rotate tables every half-hour? Something ... anything ... (nope): nothing. SUGGESTION NUMBER FOUR: Organize a series of group activities (or rotating seating plans) to make sure your guests are meeting new people, uninhibited and having fun.

To me, this sounds like a seventh grade birthday party where the parents have to try to get the boys and girls to stop acting like the other sex has cooties. If we see someone we want to meet, we go up to them and start a conversation. If we went somewhere and they had table assignments and rotating tables, we'd be out of there, pronto.

4) LOUSY DANCE SET-UP: The dance floor was too big and the music too fast. If the dance floor is small, you can move in close, brush up against, etc. etc. and nobody feels afronted. SUGGESTION NUMBER FIVE: Play slow or medium-tempo sensual music (keep your guests smelling shower fresh), and keep the spaces (and dance floor) small.

Actually, nothing bothers me more than a guy who thinks that they're being slick in copping a feel and pretending it was an unintentional "brush up". If you like me, please come talk to me. Ask me to dance. I'll let you know whether I'm interested or not.

So ... what's the concensus? Is what I expereinced a typical night at a typical lifestyle event ... or did I simply go to an event that was very poorly run and not too well-thought out?

Actually, I think you went to what is pretty normal for an off-premises event, at least in our area. I think the problem lies in the expectations of what you thought it would be. What you are describing, to me, sounds like a house party. It's smaller, more intimate, more likely to have "hands-on" hostessing and some of the things you wanted: smaller dance floor, introductions, more mingling opportunities.

I'm going to another lifesytle event in a few weeks ... but it won't be with this group. The evening wasn't a disappointment ... the organization was.

Before you go to another event, make sure you understand what the set-up will be before you get there. That way, you can decide before you get there and spend the money whether it's an event that will appeal to you.

Pepper

[WildMiCouple]

Uomo, this sounds pretty much like the standard off-premise event. But what we've found is, you have to be outgoing and put some effort in at these events to meet people. Get up and move around. Chat with others while you're .....waiting to get drinks, in line getting buffet munchies, washing hands in the bathroom

You pretty much have to make the first move when your newbies at a dance. Next time, don't be afraid to "case the joint" when you first walk in to pick out where you want to sit. If you see a table for ten with eight people at it.....mosey on up and ask if these two seats are taken.

There's never been any organized activities at the various dances we go to. And the hosts have never introduced us or others on their first visit. But, perhaps next time, ask them.

The more you go, the more comfortible you'll feel. And before you know it.....you'll be one of the regulars. And as far as your suggestions, let the hosts know. Maybe they'll impliment some of them.

Brett

[Uomo]

I appreciate the honest feedback (albeit not what I was hoping to hear).

I think I'm going to head back out onto the singles scene (undercover).

My observations are that the lifestyle is male dominanted. Men looking to swap ... or men are looking for a bi-female. What I don't see are liberated women going off to play without their husbands. So much for women's lib.

I'm a fit male model, highly-educated, early-thirties, deisgner wardwobe, drive a Jag, romanitc and sensual ... few women would turn me down, were the decision left completely up to them. But do you know what? No husband in that room (as far as I can see) is going to let their wives off to play with me without my giving him something in return (i.e. my wife). My wife ... just likes to watch (in other words: I've got nothing to trade). As I see it, I've got as much chance of scoring in the lifestyle as a single man ... and that ain't much. Correct me if I am wrong? I don't think that I am. There appears to be a clear double standard. The deck is stacked against me.

I was kind of hoping the swinging scene would work out. I don't like to be dishonest (sweet-talking single women with fanciful stories about our future lives together and dancing around my marital status) ... and yet single-women just don't seem to be all that interested in relationships of convenience (I don't know how it is so many ladies comforrtably manage to go without sex for months or years just because they haven't yet found Mr. Right). As frustrating as it is ... based on what I've seen, and what I'm hearing ... I've probably got better odds with the a-sexual single ladies (with no possessive men). Or maybe I should just start randomly hitting on married women (i.e. swinging without the male half)?

In any event, that's what I think I'm going to do. Anyone think I'm making a mistake? Or is this the right route for me, given what you know?

[Spoomonkey]

Originally Posted by Uomo

In any event, that's what I think I'm going to do. Anyone think I'm making a mistake? Or is this the right route for me, given what you know?

Well - you obviously don't understand swinging in the least... So I am guessing it is your only option.

Not trying to be harsh, but honest here...

It has nothing to do with possessive husbands or the jag that you drive. Couples tend to play together. Hit on my wife behind my back - hoping that she will sneak away with you because you are such a "catch" is faulty thinking at best...

Your assumption is that if not for the "evil husbands and their rediculous rules" women would be flinging themselves at you... The truth is, my wife would tell you the same thing I am telling you - "we play together." It is what she wants as well as me.

You really are no different than the single guy who comes to a club assuming that the wives are there looking for some "bigger and better deal". Ask the average wife on here - and she's pretty convinced that you won't be able to top her husband... Ask the average husband around here - and you'll find they aren't in the least bit threatened by some arrogant fellow who loves himself a bit too much...

You may do well in the singles scene - if you are okay with the neccessary level of dishonesty involved. But it is no wonder you didn't enjoy the swinging scene. If you don't see strong, liberated women - and do see "double standards" and husbands simply looking to "make a trade" you aren't a particularly perceptive person.

So - again - I think your plan is probably the best, because you don't get swinging or the couples (husbands/wives) involved.

Spoomonkey

[Uomo]

Again, I appreciate the blunt & honest assessment. You (and the Mrs. Spoomonkey) have always given me very thoughful feedback.

[bear_and_babe]

I agree with Spoomonkey on this one, you really don't understand the lifestyle very well. I have so many coments to make, so I am just going to throw them out in a random order.

I play with single men, however, the single men I play with are very respectful of my husband and of me. The wrong way to approach a woman is to wait for her husband to leave. Most of the single men I play with approach my husband, introduce themselves to him first, then to me. They understand that I am not trying to replace my husband.

We also play together. You will find most couples do, so getting upset that couples want to play with other couples is just silly. Again, just shows that you don't understand the lifestyle.

The wrong way to try to impress me is to tell me how wonderful you are, what car you drive, how educated you are...well, let's just say this, you are not going to get anywhere tooting your own horn.

If you tell people that you are single and you are not, well that is just lying and you will find that swingers can not stand people who lie, or cheat for that matter. If you try to fit yourself into the lifestyle as a single guy even though you are married I can tell you it is not going to work. Word will get out you are married and you will get even less play. And what kind of respect are you showing your wife if you do that?

I think that you should just step away from the lifestyle. You seem to not understand how it works. And if your wife is not really into it, then maybe she is trying to tell you something. As a couple, you will have problems if only one of you is interested in playing. I guess what I am saying is quit being so selfish and talk with your wife and figure out where to go from here.

So much for this "liberated woman's" thoughts.

[Pepper & Drew]

Originally Posted by Uomo

My observations are that the lifestyle is male dominanted. Men looking to swap ... or men are looking for a bi-female. What I don't see are liberated women going off to play without their husbands. So much for women's lib.

I'm a fit male model, highly-educated, early-thirties, deisgner wardwobe, drive a Jag, romanitc and sensual ... few women would turn me down, were the decision left completely up to them. But do you know what? No husband in that room (as far as I can see) is going to let their wives off to play with me without my giving him something in return (i.e. my wife). My wife ... just likes to watch (in other words: I've got nothing to trade). As I see it, I've got as much chance of scoring in the lifestyle as a single man ... and that ain't much. Correct me if I am wrong? I don't think that I am. There appears to be a clear double standard. The deck is stacked against me.

I'm a fit, female model, highly-educated, late twenties, designer wardrobe and drive a VW beetle (just in case you wanted to know) and I wouldn't touch you with a 10 foot pole. I know....it's shocking....

Forgive me for mocking you a little, but to assume that women wouldn't turn you down if it were left up to them is insulting to women's intellegence, and probably precisely why you've had no luck.

First, it sounds as if you were expecting women to swoon upon your entrance to the social, falling over themselves to introduce themselves to you, and then, upon you selecting the "lucky girl", she should immediately tell her husband 'see ya' and head off with you in your wife alone or, the other appealing option: he should come along and sit stiffly in the corner while your wife is off limits just to watch the two of you go at it. Sounds like a good time.... :rollseyes

Second, did it ever occur to you that couples want to find bi-females so that the liberated woman can play with another woman? All three can play together and no one is left out. Now, THAT is liberating.

Third, in swinging, it doesn't matter what car you drive. She's not going home with you and she's not getting any of your money anyway. This is not a search for a marriage partner, it's a search for a sex partner. What matters is what kind of lover you are, and since you seem to be uninterested in anything other than what's in it for you, many would mark you off there list at that point. Selfish lovers are not good lovers. Most liberated women feel like they are worth of getting as good as their getting.

Fourth, I'm convinced that the majority of griping that comes from single males comes from single males that don't "get it". I can name 7 couples that we know that prefer single males, and we don't know THAT many couples. So, if in that small cross section of swingers we know single males and the couples that like them, I don't think ALL single males have terrible luck in the hook-up department. So, your chances of "scoring" may not be as good as it is for some single males.

So, to answer your question, yes, I absolutely think going back to finding single women is the best way to go for you. There's far to many liberated women in the lifestyle that would probably be turned off by you and your attitude.

Pepper

[pumpkins1970]

Wow...no wonder you had such high expectations and were dissappointed by your visit to the off-premise event...you have no idea what swinging is. Hmm, I thought if you had been reading any posts here at all you might, but sadly you don't. Mr Pump

[Uomo]

Originally Posted by Pepper & Drew

I'm a fit, female model, highly-educated, late twenties, designer wardrobe and drive a VW beetle (just in case you wanted to know) and I wouldn't touch you with a 10 foot pole. I know....it's shocking....

Forgive me for mocking you a little, but to assume that women wouldn't turn you down if it were left up to them is insulting to women's intellegence, and probably precisely why you've had no luck.

I can name 7 couples that we know that prefer single males, and we don't know THAT many couples. So, if in that small cross section of swingers we know single males and the couples that like them, I don't think ALL single males have terrible luck in the hook-up department.

So, to answer your question, yes, I absolutely think going back to finding single women is the best way to go for you. There's far to many liberated women in the lifestyle that would probably be turned off by you and your attitude.

Pepper

Thank you, again, for your thoughful response. Yes, I forgive the mocking (actually, I apprecaite it -- it is well deserved). In real life, I am not the arrogant a-hole I appear to be here. Of course ... some women would turn me down ... clearly no one in the lifestyle would give a shit what type of car I drive ... and yes, I think you WOULD touch me with a 10 foot pole (I would never come right out and express these kinds of sentiments in real life). I'm just giving an honest assessment of my situation so as to elicit meaningful feedback (even if it comes across as arrogance).

Say what you will about women's liberation ... I just not buying it. I do not beleive most women swing with the partners out of uninhibited choice. I still believe there is an underlying element of implicit compulsion (along with a healthy dose of female denial). Are there exceptions? Sure. Could I be 100 percent wrong? ABSOLUTELY. I'm brand new and just going with my gut; throwing it out into the universe for some feedback from those in the know.

Quite interesting ... what you said about single males and the couples you know. Maybe I am a poor first read of the lifestyle? It's quite possible ...

What to do ...?

[Uomo]

Originally Posted by bear_and_babe

I play with single men, however, the single men I play with are very respectful of my husband and of me. The wrong way to approach a woman is to wait for her husband to leave. Most of the single men I play with approach my husband, introduce themselves to him first, then to me. They understand that I am not trying to replace my husband.

The wrong way to try to impress me is to tell me how wonderful you are, what car you drive, how educated you are...well, let's just say this, you are not going to get anywhere tooting your own horn.

If you try to fit yourself into the lifestyle as a single guy even though you are married I can tell you it is not going to work. Word will get out you are married and you will get even less play. And what kind of respect are you showing your wife if you do that?

I appreciate your advice on approaching. I'm hearing that sentiment voiced often. It must be true.

You are correct ... arrogance is not sexy. I can appreciate that (and express myself quite differently in real life).

No ... I was not suggesting that I lie about my marital status. My reference to my being a single guy was just an analogy. My wife knows everything. In fact, she and I were hoping the lifestyle would work out. She would prefer I be honest with a consenting adult ... then date (and perhaps bend the truth). Not quite sure what to do. From what I'm getting back by way of responses, as relates to the lifestyle, maybe I've been a little too quick to judge? I'd certainly like to think so (and hope I was).

So much thoughtful feedback ... you guys (and gals) are the best.

[Uomo]

Pepper,

When I referred to your touching me with a ten foot pole ... I was (of course) referring to your husband's Ouch!

[Pepper & Drew]

Originally Posted by Uomo

Say what you will about women's liberation ... I just not buying it. I do not beleive most women swing with the partners out of uninhibited choice. I still believe there is an underlying element of implicit compulsion (along with a healthy dose of female denial). Are there exceptions? Sure. Could I be 100 percent wrong? ABSOLUTELY. I'm brand new and just going with my gut; throwing it out into the universe for some feedback from those in the know.

Maybe I am a poor first read of the lifestyle? It's quite possible ...

What to do ...?

OK, don't buy it. If it makes you feel better to pretend that women are only going along with their husbands and are secretly dying to be with you, that's fine. Perhaps you, as someone who has attended one event and never swung is far more perceptive than those of us who are in actually in the lifestyle, or even better, are actually women.

What should you do? I would think you would be perceptive enough to figure out your next move on your own.

Pepper

[bear_and_babe]

Originally Posted by Uomo

Say what you will about women's liberation ... I just not buying it. I do not beleive most women swing with the partners out of uninhibited choice. I still believe there is an underlying element of implicit compulsion (along with a healthy dose of female denial). Are there exceptions? Sure. Could I be 100 percent wrong? ABSOLUTELY. I'm brand new and just going with my gut; throwing it out into the universe for some feedback from those in the know.

Ok, let me see if I got this straight. You go to your first lifestyle event, and off-premise dance and you think because you were not jumped as soon as you walked in the door that all the women there were being held back by their controlling husbands? Is that how you feel? Even though you think you were the best looking man in the room, that all the women should have been at your feet begging you to play with them? Do I have this right? If that is the way you feel, then you really don’t know what the lifestyle is about.

There is a saying in the lifestyle: “The men get their women into the lifestyle, but it is the women who keep the men in the lifestyle”. Ask any long term swinger, they will tell you this lifestyle is driven by the women. Most couples that we know, us included, nothing happens unless the women want it to. As I stated before, I do play with single men, and I chose who I play with, Bear does have veto power, but he never tells me no for no good reason. And on the flip side, he never forces me to play with someone who I don’t want to play with. I don’t care how good looking a guy is, I am not going to play with him just on looks alone. Personalities are more important to me.

You are getting flamed a little here, and I think you are taking it well. I would suggest that you take some time and read the posts on this board. You will learn a lot.