Discrimination against single males - isn't it a double standard?

[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.

[screaminggood]

Well Curious Jorge,

As the fem half of a couple who enjoys single men....I'm going to twist your question. In our case...all we're looking for is a single guy to bang his wife (me)!!! So we find nothing wrong with the idea that single men are only looking for sex because we're looking for different sexual experiences. In fact, my husband would prefer I only "use" the guy once and move on---the hubby says he doesn't want to complicate things with friendships. Although there are times when I overrule him.

So....I know it's not the popular thing to post because so many people here want relationships, but I'm giving you an honest answer. And I'm willing to bet that even if they won't post it, we're not the only couple in it strictly for the wild sex.

[Bama0468]

The fact is, Just as there are singles that give the rest a bad rap, there are couples that will do the same. Not trying to scare you off or anything but facts is facts.

So for those of us that do not use singles it is because we have been burned more than not and gave up and made a solid decsion to not allow them, just as some new swingers have hooked up with the wrong couple and been scared out of swinging for good.

It is this group of folks that gives the rest a bad name. Is it right? no. Can it be over come? sure! with time and patience. My wife and I have been burned by single guys, so singles are off the menu so to speak, however I have recently told a single guy on here that if we were looking for one and lived closer and all were attracted we would concider him. Why? Simply because he has consitently showed through his posts and views that he would be respectful and not try for anything more than what we three would have agreed to before hand.

It is places like this where we can openly discuss things (Couple and Single alike) and be able to see that there are singles that can be respectful and honest, where folks can see what should be the golden rules of the lifestyle.

[two42lovers]

Never quite understood the "bad apples ruin it for everyone" mentality...

How does bad behavior out of one particular guy control your opinion about a different guy? (or solo women, or couples...) It's stereotypical thinking and illogical. Feel free to do as you choose, but the blame game has us scratching our heads.

If you decide (for whatever reason) to not play with solo guys, or couples, or not play at all, it is your choice. Each of us are responsible for our own choices and outcomes, a "bad apple" cannot control us. If you decide not to play with solo guys, you have "ruined" it for yourself.

If you don't want to play with solo guys, and you don't, how can it be characterized as bad apples have ruined it for you? Sounds more like an excuse to not do what you don't want to do anyway... If you do want to play with solo guys, and you don't, for whatever reason you decide, the only one "ruining it" for you is you.

[Bama0468]

If your refering to me it was more than once, as to couples we actually had a couple that we played with that had a pushy couple before and darn near scared a perfectly good couple away from the lifestyle, luckily for them (and us) they started talking with us about the time they met the first and descided to give us a try after, they were nervous and slightly afraid after their ordeal with the first couple.

Unfortunately it is simular with singles, it will take a good respectful and patient single to break through the barrier once one is set up.

So you can see it is not steriotypical, its a matter of how many times will you allow yourself to be burned before you stop sticking you hand into the fire

[NumbskullsX2]

Originally Posted by curious_jorge

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?

Why do you single guys always use "discriminate" like it's a bad word or something? We couples discriminate all the time, and so do you.

Just this morning, I did a little shopping. I "discriminated" against some bananas that were overly-ripe, some blueberries that were over-priced, and some onion-rolls, because neither of us likes onion-rolls.

Is that "discrimination," or smart shopping?

I also bought some spaghetti, but ONLY because I was able to purchase some spaghetti sauce as well. I don't like spaghetti without the sauce, and she doesn't like the sauce without the spaghetti. If they hadn't had any sauce, I would have had no need for the spaghetti, and therefore, wouldn't have bought it.

Is THAT "discrimination," or simply making sure they have ALL the ingredients I need to make a COMPLETE dinner before I place anything in my cart?

A single male is, to us, like a grocer that sells only spaghetti. No sauce, no garlic bread, no salad, no wine. Just spaghetti. You could be selling the best damn spaghetti the world has ever seen, but you still wouldn't have many people coming to your market, because "average" spaghetti WITH sauce is better than world-class spaghetti withOUT sauce.

Now, when you come along and say to us, "I'm not here just to bang a guys wife" you have me REALLY confused, because I don't know why a single guy would join a swingers website EXCEPT to bang other guys wives.

Are you looking for a Bridge partner? Somebody to trade baseball cards or carpool to work with? A person who will play online checkers with you? If so, there are numerous other, better websites which will lead you to those people.

This is a swingers website.

We come here to bang other guys wives.

What ARE you looking for, and who will be bringing "the sauce?"

[two42lovers]

Not referring to you, Bama - wasn't writing to anyone in particular, just writing in general to everyone who says they don't play with whole categories of people because of "bad apples". My question is about the whole idea that people decide not to play with solo guys (or any broad category of people) because of specific bad experiences. Isn't this the definition of stereotyping?

It's a little bit like a gold prospector/miner giving up on looking for gold because after several attempts he had failed to find gold. Isn't that circular reasoning? (i.e. the empty holes have spoiled it for all the good gold mines.) How exactly does that work? -lol!

Good, fun, respectful solo guys have about as much in common with the "bad apples" as gold mines have with empty holes. If you are a skilled prospector looking for gold, how does encountering "empty holes" put you off from looking for gold? If you are a experienced miner, you will recognize an empty hole for what it is very quickly.

If you choose not to be a gold miner, isn't it really more like you don't care for gold so much, and would rather look for diamonds? (i.e. you don't care about solo guys and would rather look for couples.) If this is the case, why the talk about bad apples spoiling it for you?

[imsherona2]

Originally Posted by NumbskullsX2

Why do you single guys always use "discriminate" like it's a bad word or something? We couples discriminate all the time, and so do you.

Just this morning, I did a little shopping. I "discriminated" against some bananas that were overly-ripe, some blueberries that were over-priced, and some onion-rolls, because neither of us likes onion-rolls.

Is that "discrimination," or smart shopping?

I also bought some spaghetti, but ONLY because I was able to purchase some spaghetti sauce as well. I don't like spaghetti without the sauce, and she doesn't like the sauce without the spaghetti. If they hadn't had any sauce, I would have had no need for the spaghetti, and therefore, wouldn't have bought it.

Is THAT "discrimination," or simply making sure they have ALL the ingredients I need to make a COMPLETE dinner before I place anything in my cart?

A single male is, to us, like a grocer that sells only spaghetti. No sauce, no garlic bread, no salad, no wine. Just spaghetti. You could be selling the best damn spaghetti the world has ever seen, but you still wouldn't have many people coming to your market, because "average" spaghetti WITH sauce is better than world-class spaghetti withOUT sauce.

Now, when you come along and say to us, "I'm not here just to bang a guys wife" you have me REALLY confused, because I don't know why a single guy would join a swingers website EXCEPT to bang other guys wives.

Are you looking for a Bridge partner? Somebody to trade baseball cards or carpool to work with? A person who will play online checkers with you? If so, there are numerous other, better websites which will lead you to those people.

This is a swingers website.

We come here to bang other guys wives.

What ARE you looking for, and who will be bringing "the sauce?"

LMAO, you are just too funny but you sure have a way with words!! I applaude you!!

[absingleman]

Originally Posted by NumbskullsX2

Why do you single guys always use "discriminate" like it's a bad word or something? We couples discriminate all the time, and so do you.

Just this morning, I did a little shopping. I "discriminated" against some bananas that were overly-ripe, some blueberries that were over-priced, and some onion-rolls, because neither of us likes onion-rolls.

Is that "discrimination," or smart shopping??"

The modern english language does not have enough words. Too many times the meaning of the word depends on its context, and whether a word is used positively or negatively is based on the intent of the writer.

Discrimination the way you used it means to make a decision based on a set of established and measurable criteria. The other way discrimination is used is to make an arbitrary decision based on an assumed stereotype without gathering any measurable facts.

I don't get down on couples that don't want to meet me...thats their choice. I don't bitch about clubs that say no single males under no circumstances...that is the owner's choice of who he wants to cater to. I do have a problem that says someone is not swinger because they don't do the things they do (see what I mean about not enough words?). As in the rest of life, once you drop the stereotypes you have to actually judge people as individuals instead of a faceless part of a vast group. That is where some single men get the idea they are being discriminated against. To them its not a matter of you personally not wanting to be with a single man, but of you not seeing them as an individual. That part is their problem, unless you have given them a reason to think otherwise.

About not being there to sleep with someone else's wife:
There are easier ways to sleep with someone else's wife than to pay $30 to $50 a month to put up an ad that most probably will be ignored, or to go to a club where three out of four people, couple or single female, will smile and walk away before you get past hello. There are, however, benefits to swinging that don't exist when you help some woman cheat on her husband...like being able to openly flirt with her and maybe even become friends.

but thats just my observation. Your point of view is going to be decided by what YOU want out of swinging and how you think other people will respond. If you don't ask, you won't know. And if you refuse to believe the reasons they give, thats on you.

[sereneiders]

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.