Interesting Dilemma - Twist on "Taking One for the Team"

[txduo2000]

Ok, I am going to try to word this in a way that will be easy to understand. It's a story given over by some friends (Ken and Barbie) of ours involving two couples that they were in communication with ... one they Played with (Couple P) and one they only talked to occasionally with the plan to eventually get together (Couple T).

And the only reason I am putting this up here is to elicit some points of view and opinions on the whole thing. And because I kinda think it's a funny dilemma, strange-funny ... odd ... out there. And wonder if anyone has ever had this happen to them.

Ok, here we go:

Ken and Barbie had talked to and met Couple P after several emails and telephone calls that elicited a four-way compatibility. They all got togther; full swap. Ok, things were good .... but maybe not.

Later on, Ken and Barbie find out that Couple P and Couple T know each other ... pretty well, in fact. Not sure exactly how this information was gleaned; guess it was sort of a kiss and tell kind of situation among them all. Anyway, Couple T proceeds to tell Ken and Barbie that Couple P really only wanted to be with them because Mrs. P wanted Ken really badly. That Mr. P just tolerated Barbie for the sake of Mrs. P getting a piece of Ken. That Mr. P really was not attracted to Barbie and would rather she not have been involved at all, but since Ken and Barbie only play together, he had to "take one" for the sake of Mrs. P's happiness. Of course, this information was never relayed from Couple P to Ken and Barbie; it was in fact "hearsay" relayed by a third party. Of course, Ken and Barbie were upset by this, and stopped communications with BOTH couples. Their feeling was that "why would Couple T even say anything like this if it wasn't remotely true?" and then toward Couple T: "If they are going to be stirring up trouble like that, we want nothing to do with them."

Now I know that most of you, like us, adamantly refuse to "take one for the team" as it should be. But have any of you been unknowingly put into a situation where you might have found out later that you did just that? I mean, in a way, Barbie kind of took one for the team there, being that she was with a man who didn't really want to be with her.

Here's a new wrinkle to this dilemma ... Mr. and I do not know Couple T but we did receive an email from them. We know about this whole fiasco with Ken and Barbie, so we know that they perceive them as troublemakers. I like their profile and their pics and would like to maybe meet them. But hubby says he doesn't think it's a good idea because of their trouble making reputation.

Hmmmm???? Anyone .... anyone .... Bueller??????

[two4youinswva]

Originally Posted by txduo2000

I kinda think it's a funny dilemma, strange-funny ... odd ... out there. And wonder if anyone has ever had this happen to them.

Wow, you're right! Odd, but unfortunately more common than one would think.
Some folks just love to create "problems" where there shouldn't be any.

But have any of you been unknowingly put into a situation where you might have found out later that you did just that? I mean, in a way, Barbie kind of took one for the team there, being that she was with a man who didn't really want to be with her.

Not that we are aware of. But hey, it could happen to anyone, couldn't it?

Mr. and I do not know Couple T but we did receive an email from them. We know about this whole fiasco with Ken and Barbie, so we know that they perceive them as troublemakers. I like their profile and their pics and would like to maybe meet them. But hubby says he doesn't think it's a good idea because of their trouble making reputation.

I would tend to agree with hubby on this one. We do this for fun, and don't care for any BS involved. This couple may or may not have done what they are accused of, but we're not going to take the time to play detective to find out. We're just going to avoid the whole situation.

[txduo2000]

I think you have been following me all day, two4you!

Seriously, I tend to agree with hubby .... though I am not generally one to shy away from controversy, wouldn't you agree? lol

BUT ... I DO tend to try to empathize, and I certainly wouldn't want to be the one that was being "tolerated" simply for some grabby chick to get her digs into MY hubby ... I do like for the HIM to want me as much as the HER wants my man! And more importantly, I wouldn't want to find that tidbit of information out from a third party ... so, I guess these guys might just be troublemakers.

So, I guess I will acquiesce to hubby on this one.

It's a shame ... they seemed to have quite a good deal in common with us, and man does her guy look damn good in a cowboy hat!!!!

[good times]

We played with a couple once and afterwords they told us that they often take one for the team. All the time we were with them I just didn't feel like the female was that into me, but it was really obvious that the husband was really into Mrs. GT. So after that we haven't played with them again because their attitude about taking one for the team just doesn't jive with ours and I can't overcome the feeling that she is just taking one for the team when she is with me.

As far as this couple you are refering to, we would probably take it real slow with them. We have had similar experiances with couples that have said things about others and usually try to dissregard what is said, get to know the people ourselves, and make our own opinions. The only thing we have done for sure is we usually avoid people that talk about others because we figure they will be telling other people things about us that may or may not be true next.

By the way, most of the times when someone has told us something about someone else, we have later found out it wasn't true.

[two4youinswva]

Originally Posted by txduo2000

I think you have been following me all day, two4you!

I swear, it's not stalking, so no restraining order is necessary!

You know, the more I think about it, I would really be upset if I were Barbie & Ken, and would also cut it off with both couples.
It would really hurt to find out you're getting the "wingman" treatment.
It would also make me wonder about the motive of a couple that would pass this type of painful information on to the used couple.

We know of a couple that has badmouthed friends of ours. We would never tell our friends what was said. Nothing good would come out of it. We will also never play with the couple that said those things.

We just want to keep it fun, and simple.

[pumpkins1970]

Well taking one for the team is never a good idea in my book, (Mr Pumpkin here), but this other couple sounds like a high maintenance couple, kinda of like a stripper...good looking facelick , but usually full of problems! Not worth the bother if they are going to bring along all the drama/gossip only fit for an afternoon soap opera, LOL. There are plenty of other fish in the sea, good luck! XOXO-XXX

[txduo2000]

Originally Posted by two4youinswva

I swear, it's not stalking, so no restraining order is necessary!

You crack me up ... tail me anytime!!!!

[jstlkng]

OK Guys...I need to understand something here...maybe this is not the thread on which to discuss it...but here goes anyway. Most everybody I know in swinging "takes one for the team" once in a while. Why I do it all the time. My wife is interested in the lifestyle, but not interested in swinging...I am interested both in the lifestyle and the actual swinging...but since she doesn't want to play with anyone but me...ever...she says...(but her fantasies don't hold true to that)...then I take one for the team all the time...don't I. I'm not trying to find fault with anyone's philosophies but don't we always have some give and take in most all that we do in life? And so if we truly love our spouses and we truly love playing then aren't there times that we "take one for the team" just because we are so much in love with our spouse and would do most anything for their good and their pleasure? It's my belief that self-centeredness always denies the other partner something because one doesn't want something for him or her self when the other might enjoy it just like sometimes self-centeredness rises its ugly head when one wants something for him or her self at the expense of the other. Isn't true grace and class are demonstrated best when we actually do participate in something we'd personally rather not but do it any way just so we can be the giving individual that true love demands? I deny myself the physical pleasure of playing with others just so I can never hurt my loving wife...I love her that much...and I know it sounds trite to say, but I would play with any woman if my wife were interested in playing with her S.O.

jstlkng...

[txduo2000]

jstlking: you would, then, by your own definition, be an wonderful choice for Couple P for play partners!

Seriously, I think that most of us here would agree that "taking one for the team" is a little different than communicated compromise ... which, I think you are spelling out in your post.

Turn your situation around; you want to swing, and your wife does not. But let's say she did it anyway, against her own desires, for you ... she would definitely be taking one for the team there because she would be engaging in an activity that she would otherwise not wish to engage in. And this is the worst form of "taking one for the team" that there is, IMO.

Conversely, and in the reality, you are not swinging, because your wife doesn't want to. That is communicated compromise in my opinion. You DO love your wife. You DO enjoy having sex with her, right? So you aren't actually DOING anything you don't want to do, right? You are simply giving up something she doesn't want to do. And the majority of us here agree that it is best to go at the rate of the least comfortable partner in a couple. The least comfortable with the lifestyle is your wife, therefore, you give up so that she doesn't have to give in.

I hope I am conveying this correctly and in a way that you understand my meaning.

My husband and I have a term that we use. Ok, it's not going to sound very nice, but we use it when we are perusing ads. We look at a couple, and hubby may be VERY attracted to her, I may not be so attracted to him, but we like their personality. If he's "doable" (that's our term, and it's not as derogatory in our meaning as it sounds, really.) in my mind, then it is definitely something that we will pursue. "Doable" simply means to us that the person may not be our ideal, but they don't cross any of our "don't do" lists. Like I really am not attracted to guys with long hair, or a multitude of tattoos, or heavy facial hair, or grossly overweight, or short. So, if a guy doesn't fit any of those no-no's for me, then he is "doable". My husband has a list of no-no's where he absolutely won't go as well, as I am sure that many do. Everyone has their preferences, and some of those preferences outweigh others in terms of importance.

It is very difficult to find that ideal couple ... we agree to that. It's hard enough, I have said it time and again, to find two people who truly mesh ... almost impossible to find FOUR that do. So we communicate and compromise on situations where people might not be EXACTLY what we are looking for, but if we can find something attractive about them, be it personality or a great ad, or what have you, then I do not consider that "taking one for the team". And you know what? Some might not be able to do it our way.

However, in my original post, my understanding of poor Barbie's situation was that the hubby of the other couple just did not like her at all, not before, not during, and not after. So apparently, she had no redeeming qualities in his point of view, but he did her so that his wife could have her guy.

[jstlkng]

OK txduo2000, I do agree with what you say...and my wife and I have compromised...I let her have her fantasies and we have a friend "george" who is almost real and completely detached and fills her oh so much fuller than I ever could. She loves the way he just hums along and causes neat little vibrations in her vagina while I lick her clitoris. But maybe that is too much info ) In any case "he" is who we swing with. And count on it, sex of the mind can be quite fulfilling. However, I think that Mr. P is quite an admirable gentleman...seriously, what gentleman would leave a lady unsatisfied as Barbie surely would have been had he not been the gentleman he is. And certainly he allowed Mrs. P to fulfill her dream date with Ken, didn't he...so I don't think he did anything wrong...he made a great sacrifice, one which I trust Mrs. P appreciates very much.

You know, it seems to me that there is way too much guilt demonstrated among swinging couples. Either sexual pleasure shared with other couples/singles, etc, is ok and should be guilt free or we may all wind up following "Randall Flagg" around.

just my thoughts,

jstlkng...