Are you a Swinger?

[Pensacolapair]

Originally Posted by JustAskJulie

That is pretty much what I use to determine things as they apply to this site, specifically clubs that attempt to submit themselves... and the swinger stories. The rule on the stories has always been a couple must be involved somewhere (even if they are swinging seperately... or if the story is told from the perspective of a single who is playing with them). Beyond that, there is no set definition. Swinging is by most definitions a large fully encompassing term that encompasses many FORMS of swinging. So then the question becomes, What kind of swinger are you?

We agree that terms such as 'full swapper', soft swapper', 'watcher', etc are better used as indicators of chosen activity within the main category of 'Swinger'. So -- our answer to the OP is "Why Yes..we are"

In our society we seem to have a need for wrapping things up into neat, easy to handle bundles. We are much more comfortable with definative handles for everything..including things that by their very nature are difficult to pin down - but there is truth to the fact that we gotta call it something...and "That thing we do" is kinda clumsy!

In our opinion, swinging started out (and remains) as a couple-based activity - kind of a loophole for those who saw monogamy as an emotional concept instead of a sexual one. Singles got involved because in theory, 1 person is easier to add to the equation than 2 is. Most couples who have spent any time in the Lifestyle know that that theory isn't necessarily true. While admittedly we havn't been single for over 25 years, we havn't seen anything to lead us to belive that singles today are doing anything we didn't do. They aren't 'swinging'..they are just doing one of the things that single people do - having non-committal sex with different people they are attracted to. Generally, our society feels that if one is going to be promiscuous, the time to do it is when they are single. The only probable advantages in the 'swinging' lifestyle for singles are an additional emphasis on NSA and possibly reducing the logistics involved.

Our definition of 'swinging' is when a committed couple decides to physically involve others in their sex life to varying degrees. This is where we tend to disagree with how many define 'swinging'. We don't consider what your level of activity is as the determining factor in whether or not you are a 'swinger'. If the starting point is accepted societal sexual norms, to us it becomes rather simple. The accepted societal norm for sexual activity between a couple is behind closed doors and only involving said couple. We totally disagree with statements such as,"Soft-swappers aren't swingers" or "Folks into Watch-us-watch-you aren't really swingers". We even consider those who enjoy going to a club and simply soaking up the 'sexual vibe' and then going home and screwing each other into a coma to be 'swingers'. Our response to those who try to designate who the 'real swingers' are is to point out how it happens to work out that the only 'real swingers' are those whose level of activity happens to be the same as theirs.

Although there are constants within the 'swinging' culture, 'swinging' activity or style is by no means a static thing... nor should it be. People who start out as watchers, can decide to get into soft-swap. People who start out as soft-swappers can decide to full-swap. And yes, people who have been pretty much anything-goes-as-long-as-it-doesn't-result-in-defibrillator-use can decide to dial it back to just watching.. and it doesn't mean that they have to turn in their 'swingers' card!

As a side note, we are often suprised at how many people misconstrue and therefore bristle at the term 'Lifestyle'. Many see it as meaning something that dominates one's activities, incorrectly seeing the inference as being that they aren't interested in anything other than things sexual and the pursuit of same. Personally, we see the term 'Lifestyler' as interchangeable with 'swinger' for most applications.

[two42lovers]

This has certainly developed into an interesting thread.

That is basically the determination I made when setting the ground rules for the stories section.

Yes. I was just wondering how the line came to be drawn there, instead of the wider "recreational sex" idea.

I've tried in my own way to explore, a little bit, the differences between singles and couples in the lifestyle. But couples are only one of the categories. Our discussion is about types of people we might encounter in the lifestyle. By "types" we mean what and who they will and will not do sexually. Lee also invited us to share our thoughts about the subject.

Most of us already think in terms of sexual preferences and boundaries. Isn't it what this discussion about types and categories is really about? We use scales for gender preference: straight, bi-curious, bi, etc. Pretty much can't join a swing site without declaring for one or another. You also have to say if you prefer contacts from men, and/or women, and/or couples, and if you are looking for full, and/or soft, and/or no swap. The idea is to say the kinds of things you are interested in, so others who want the same can find you.

Picking a category for other people may be as simple as figuring out what they are looking for and how they go about it, but as we have seen there is nothing simple about picking a category for ourselves. Maybe it's because we are all dynamic, and evolving? The idea of boxing ourselves in with a rigid definition feels like we're limiting ourselves, and counter to the whole adventure.

[JustAskJulie]

Originally Posted by two42lovers

This has certainly developed into an interesting thread.



Yes. I was just wondering how the line came to be drawn there, instead of the wider "recreational sex" idea.

Probably because that was never what this site was about. When this site started (10 Years ago) it was "The Swingers Board & Gigalo Page" the latter referring to the single guys who posted their ads here (at the time it was an ad site). Everything I researched in swinging at the time told me that it was something that involved couples and that was the belief that I came to. Can singles be swingers? Yes, but they can't swing without a couple. Two singles having sex isn't swinging, therefore it doesn't really fit and stories involving two singles having sex wouldn't really turn on most people who are looking to read stories about "swinging". I think most who are looking for stories about "swinging" would agree with that.

[duskysub]

Ok, hubby and i are full swap swingers, play alone and together. BDSM is another lifestyle altogether. We are 24/7 in that one as well. One term you didn't mention here was polyamory but i saw a triad on the board so we might as well include it. We're into that to. He's a hedonist and i'm a nympho so i guess that explains it!

[JustAskJulie]

Originally Posted by good times

As far as defining swingers go, I still prefer the general, "those who have sex solely for recreational purposes."

Ok, so in that case, any couple with no intention of having children would be swingers - since if you aren't pro-creating the majority of your sex is recreational (with exceptions for sex/ love-making just to share/show love).

[Lightenup]

This has been a very interesting discussion and topic. Both of us have really enjoyed all of the posts.

But, that got us to wondering about what our status was back when we first started swinging in college. Since we didn't always both play on the same nights for several reasons, did we just have an open marriage and were not really swinging? Did we only become swingers later on when we decided for convenience to only play together?

Finally, what is our status now since it has been a couple of years since our last encounter? Are we now ex-swingers who are wanting to become active again, but just have not found a couple that we're both comfortable with?

BTW, we don't consider ourselves swingers. We're a couple who enjoyed the activities once and would like to rejoin the ranks.

A & M

[warrencouple]

Originally Posted by good times

As far as defining swingers go, I still prefer the general, "those who have sex solely for recreational purposes." In other words, I wouldn't exclude singles but would exclude voyeurs and exhibitionists.

Originally Posted by JustAskJulie

Ok, so in that case, any couple with no intention of having children would be swingers - since if you aren't pro-creating the majority of your sex is recreational (with exceptions for sex/ love-making just to share/show love).

So, by that definition, myself and the wife are swingers! No desire for kids, so all our sex is recreational!

I'd think a slightly better definition, starting from that premise, would be what PensacolaPair indicated, a couple that involves, to some degree, other people / couples in their sex life. Personally, I tend to lean towards Pensacolapairs definition, by which, myself and the wife are *not* swingers, as we have not included anyone else in our sex life (yet.)

Originally Posted by JustAskJulie

Probably because that was never what this site was about. When this site started (10 Years ago) it was "The Swingers Board & Gigalo Page" the latter referring to the single guys who posted their ads here (at the time it was an ad site).

You mean this site: Web Archive of www.Swingersboard.com from December 2, 1998

And now, back to the topic!
Jason

[toycple]

We are a full swap/completely open couple.

[CXXC]

Mrs. CXXC and I define ourselves as swingers. We have moved from solo play to our present desire to be with couples only. There are times when this is not possible so we fall back to solo play. However, as we do not wish to have children, we engage in recreational sex. I dont think that is a good defining option for anyone in the lifestyle. I think swinging would best be defined as couples engaged in sexual congress with others either solo or as a couple.

[JustAskJulie]

Originally Posted by warrencouple

You mean this site: Web Archive of www.Swingersboard.com from December 2, 1998

That's the one God bless google cache and archive.org, I lost my copy of that version years ago.

[cedarwhackers]

Why do we have to pick one? It's been our experience that any one on your list can be "fun" depending on the time, place, and situation.

[JustAskJulie]

Originally Posted by cedarwhackers

Why do we have to pick one? It's been our experience that any one on your list can be "fun" depending on the time, place, and situation.

in that case, I'd say ALL OF THE ABOVE

[Chitowndk4u]

Swinger at heart, that has done a full swap, same room sex but will most likely never be able to do it again.

I enjoy the stories and tales of everyone's adventures.

[CXXC]

Just thinking aobut this thread and I came up with an idea. Why not ask "Who is NOT a swinger?" And then ask them to give their reason why they do not feel they fit the mold(s)

[If_You_Please]

I tend to try to avoid definitions as a general rule...all I know is that I thoroughly enjoy doing things to people/having things done to me that makes them (and me!) happy. They're happy, I'm happy, a good time is had by all. I have my personal preferences, sure, but I don't let them get in the way - hell, it all feels good!! I suppose I'm just a pleaser, and there are few better mediums for giving and receiving pleasure than sex.