No single males? Why not??

[BettyAnnMBSC]

This is not about sex this is about respect. I do not know why people say swinging is not all about sex to single males like we don't know that and then in the next breath act like it is. The fact is females get better treatment pertaining to sex or not.

Well, what would we have here in the lifestyle if we took out the sex equation -- well, we'd just meet people.

I'd propose that swinging IS about sex. It's very much about sex. And very little about anything else.

So, why do couples not invite single men to their party -- SEX! they want women and single women are just that and couples bring a woman.

Maybe my earlier post with all of the rationalizations was missing that one all important point. Maybe it's not about personality, or build, or any other qualifier as much as it is about SEX! Maybe it's about girls get laid easier than guys everywhere except in the gay bar. And that's just not fair to the guys -- we should all be nicer and let them sleep with us more often {sarcasm}

That'd make the whole debate easier wouldn't it? I still have to wonder though -- if all these women are getting laid, but none of the guys are -- there must be one really tired and worn out guy out there Gentlemen, it does seem that from the replies to this and other posts that many women on these boards (myself included) DO invite single guys -- that implies then, if you're not getting invited, it's not because you're single...

[Bob123]

I think it says no single males cause most of the things for couples are really for women. Men love women so much more than women love men so men go along with it. The wedding is her day. The engagement and the ring is for her. Men try and last longer in bed and try to learn what to do to please her. It is about what the women want. And women once they find a guy who will impregnate them and support them, want to have sex with other women.

[curious24]

you know... i've said this before.. finding the "good nice" single guy is like finding the elusive single bi female... the only difference is that finding the good nice single male you have to weed through all the freak'n bad ones.. but there are no single bi females to "weed" through.. you just don't ever hardly see them...

but i think if you were to take a poll some how you would find that the number of good nice single men are about the same as the elusive single bi female..

just my .02

[BettyAnnMBSC]

The lack of sensitivity to single males hurts me.

I am truly sorry you feel hurt by that issue. I assure you that the way many people treat 225# women hurts me and my husband would like to share with you about what it's like to be a 5'4" tall man.

I'd like to tell you about how hurt I felt when I wasn't encouraged to go to college when I was in High School (I was told I didn't have what it takes by the HS counselor, she was obviously an idiot) -- only to put it off a few years and then get into a fine University with 150% financial aid and have held Dean's List honors every semester.

I'm sure there are plenty of folks on this board and elsewhere that will be more than happy to tell you about hurt. Ask a veteran about heartache. Ask that geeky guy with the pocket protector about hurt. Ask anyone that belongs to a minority group of any kind.

HELL -- ASK ANYONE! everyone suffers some pain and heartache in life. We then move on or adapt to it.

Either way -- I don't believe that anyone says "I want to hurt single mens feelings so I don't invite them to play with us." So, the pain of the result is not the cause of the result. Let's not get into circular logic here or we will never come to understand why some couples don't invite single men.... That is why we're reading this thread, right?

Bob, you are very good at introducing logical fallacy into a debate -- but I see through it. Let's talk about the "why" -- you can do that can't you? If not then concede that you don't know why -- but you know you don't like it.

[BettyAnnMBSC]

I think it says no single males cause most of the things for couples are really for women. Men love women so much more than women love men so men go along with it. The wedding is her day. The engagement and the ring is for her. Men try and last longer in bed and try to learn what to do to please her. It is about what the women want. And women once they find a guy who will impregnate them and support them, want to have sex with other women.

EXCELLENT!!!

At least it follows to some degree....

Now, do you really believe that women really would prefer other women over men in general? Is that what you're saying here?

:p

[Bob123]

yes

women are nicer to women than they are to men I see it everywhere I go or look or listen

So yes I would say women like women more than men on all levels accept they need a man to make sperm for them and they can get men to pay for them and die to protect them and stuff, things they probably couldn't get a woman to do for them.

[BettyAnnMBSC]

Now we're getting into some intersting dialog...

You know, I have to agree on these issues -- at least from an anthropologic viewpoint.

Men hold the role of breadwinner - hunter - protector
Woman of home maker and caretaker

Then if that's the case in general, and if we argue that humans are not really inclined to monogamy -- can we argue whether women would rather be with women? It seems for the home and hearth (and cuddle factor) that they would.

Though, if we remove men from the equation then we lose reproductive motives as well as the breadwinner function.

Is it then that couples don't ask single men to play because what we have is really two issues at key point:

1) humans are not inherently monogamous -- he wants to have sex with other women. but since she can reproduce - he'd rather she didn't have sex with other men.
2) women would rather have a woman around. she wants to have sex with other women.

He accepts that she can have another woman solely so that he can too -- she accepts that he sleeps with the other woman so that she can too?

If this is true (at least in part), then the debate over guys feeling left out is a dead discussion -- there is no resolution to the above scenario that includes a single male addition.

It also means that the only purpose for the male in this small segment of interpersonal association is to provide food and protection == IF another male is allowed in, it is only because he brought the new woman.

This then leads to a debate (hopefully another thread) in favor of polyamory and polygamy involving multiple women...

Of course, this could be too that:

Most men find the idea of two women making love as a sexual attraction while at the same time, they find any thought of two men making any sexual contact as very repulsive. Therefor, the male partner in many relationships will not encourage the introduction of another man when he will encourage the introduction of another woman. And we women are known to do many things just "because he likes it so much".... If this then is the case, then again - there is no hope for the single man in a coupled relationship of this type.

[RnLinohio]

Originally posted by Bob123
I think it says no single males cause most of the things for couples are really for women. Men love women so much more than women love men so men go along with it. The wedding is her day. The engagement and the ring is for her. Men try and last longer in bed and try to learn what to do to please her. It is about what the women want. And women once they find a guy who will impregnate them and support them, want to have sex with other women.

Ok, this is L now. R has been showing me this post all evening and after this comment by you Bob i have to put me 2 cents in.

Ok you complain that the people on here are putting ALL single men in one classification (they are A**holes), but here you are doing the samething with women. You may have had a bad relationship in the past, but that is not to say all women are like the woman you were with.

And the thing about the rings and wedding being just for the women. The marriage and Rings are a custom from the past..... and it was a MAN not a women that started it. Read it in any history book. The brides family NOT the grooms family pays for the wedding.

And in closing, i was the one that brought it to my wife to try being with another women. Not her bringing it to me first. She even told me no for a while, and then started thinking about it AFTER i had given up on it. and brought it back up to me, and at that time i was more than willing to share that with her.

We have been married for 13 yrs, and yes we have flaws in our relationship just like any other relationship. The difference is we work out our differences together, not me giving in just to please her.

Bob i do truely feel sorry that you feel that way about women, but i am pretty sure you will find the right one for you. Just remember not all women are like the one that hurt you. Just be patcient and understanding.

L

[Perseus]

Originally posted by thump29
Until recently we had considered single males up until I decided to give one a chance and he was a jerk. After that experience I do not really know whether we would consider another single male. I do happen to think there are some decent single males in this lifestyle and they do deserve a chance, but you have to understand that it is guys like the one we included that hurt the single males reputation.

Hmm... But if you had had a bad experience with a couple or single girl because they were flakey or jerky, they wouldn't hurt the reputation of couples or women? I understand what Bob has been saying all along, he just pushes buttons to hard.

I have been around some couples I wouldn't swing with because of thier personallity just like I have dated women I would never go near again... *shrug*

Perseus

[BettyAnnMBSC]

So yes I would say women like women more than men on all levels accept they need a man to make sperm for them and they can get men to pay for them and die to protect them and stuff, things they probably couldn't get a woman to do for them.

It's a fairly reasoned argument but the fallacy of this argument is this:

1) it assumes that women want or need "sperm"
2) it assumes that sex is the only way to get it.

Both assumptions are flawed. It is obvious that some women do not wish to have children and further, some women can't get pregnant -- do you propose that these women have lost 50% desire for men on that count.

There exist any number of ways to get pregnant that do not involve sex with a man. This is the 21st century -- there are options to sex. That then dispells the idea that a man as "sperm donor" is terminally faulted.

On the other debate -- the later part of the 20th century and this first part of the 21st clearly give us examples of women willing to "die for" what they believe in. History gives us numerous examples of women willing to die for both their husband and children. Unless you want me to provide examples from history, then your argument on that count is terminally faulted to. Remember that St. Joan d'Arc was a woman willing to fight and die for what she believed in and that the casualty list of our recent war with Iraq includes women as well as men. Women are clearly prepared to pay the price

Further: there are far too many recent examples of same-sex comiited relationships to argue that a women wouldn't be willing to bring home the bacon -- even without our recent change in social acceptance of FF coupled families -- there are historical examples of women that provided all subsitence for their family without the aid of a man. Men then are not needed for breadwinning as much as some men would like to believe.

So, I think we can say with some rationality that the reason some couples don't invite men is not:
1) because men are only good as sperm donors - there are alternatives.
2) because women won't serve a protector role - they clearly will.
3) because women won't play the provider role - they do it every day.

Then what we have done here is establish a few reasons that are not why some couples don't invite single men but, we've yet to determine the original point of question -- why do some couples not invite single men? We can't debate the topic if we bring into the debate an annonymous authority.

While I concede that I have used an appeal to popularity motive and a style over substance argument (in this post) in some posts here -- the appeal to pity is not a valid introduction into this discussion.

If I didn't know better -- I'd think that you had gotten a list of logical fallacies and are attempting to present one of each into this debate. We're not going to take on attacks on the presenter next are we? That's be sad....

Let's explore this idea ad nauseum -- "why do some couple not invite single men to play?" -- the real why -- not the self agrandizing why.

Or has it been covered in the other posts to completion?

[BettyAnnMBSC]

Hmm... But if you had had a bad experience with a couple or single girl because they were flakey or jerky, they wouldn't hurt the reputation of couples or women? I understand what Bob has been saying all along, he just pushes buttons to hard.

We'd probably define the specifics of what we didn't like about that single female or the couple and not apply an overgeneralization. At least not based on a single experience. If we met several single girls and every one was a jerky flake -- you don't think we'd probably decide that this part of the lifestyle wasn't for us? Of course we would - after a few, we'd assume that "they're all nuts"

We would let a single experience direct us in decisions though -- we once got involved with a couple that had serious legal issues in the works. He was on probation for something he said he didn't do. They were overly stressed both emotionally and financially.

Would we think twice about getting involved with another couple in that same situation -- yep, we would.

Does that mean we discriminate against people on probation -- well if you want to call it that -- but we're allowed to set our own standards. Just as some people don't want to see us because of his or my age.

None of this answers the question of "why couples don't invite singles..." though -- it simply addresses some reasons why those reasons may be faulty. We can't find fault with the reasons before we define them can we?

[Perseus]

Originally posted by BettyAnnMBSC
We'd probably define the specifics of what we didn't like about that single female or the couple and not apply an overgeneralization. At least not based on a single experience. If we met several single girls and every one was a jerky flake -- you don't think we'd probably decide that this part of the lifestyle wasn't for us? Of course we would - after a few, we'd assume that "they're all nuts"

If I thought like that about women, I would have given them up a long time ago!!!!

That said though, you are right, you let you past guide your decisions..

None of this answers the question of "why couples don't invite singles..." though -- it simply addresses some reasons why those reasons may be faulty. We can't find fault with the reasons before we define them can we?

As to reasons, I think there are many reasons for couples to be looking for couples and bi women, but not single men. I can list them if you like, but I am sure you know them by now... Are they good or bad reasons? No, they are what they have agreed too and that is one of the basic tenets of swinging. More power to them.

I just hope they keep a small shade of optimism that guys like me are really out there.

Perseus

[Flori_DAMAN]

Originally posted by Bob123
I think it says no single males cause most of the things for couples are really for women. Men love women so much more than women love men

Men love women so much more than women love men. Very good point.....hope you get some when your wife reads this...


John

[OhioCouple]

Originally posted by Perseus
Hmm... But if you had had a bad experience with a couple or single girl because they were flakey or jerky, they wouldn't hurt the reputation of couples or women? I understand what Bob has been saying all along, he just pushes buttons to hard.

I have been around some couples I wouldn't swing with because of thier personallity just like I have dated women I would never go near again... *shrug*

Whew! Hasn't this been an active thread tonight.

Perseus, I understand what you are saying. We have had a bad experience with a couple, never had one with a single girl (can't find one) and no it didn't taint couples. Why? Because bad couples aren't lurking around every corner (In our experience so far). Bad experiences with *supposedly* single men (you can never be sure) on the other hand are. Quite often they are cheaters or arm chair masturbationists, looking for an easy lay, and disrespectful of a couples relationship.

We have met with couples, somewhere in the area of 20 or 30 paired couples. We only sexually connected with a small hand full. Of those 20 to 30 couples only two misrepresented themselves. Now mind you I said actually met with, not just exchanged e-mail with. We have probably exchanged e-mail with roughly a 100 or better, over the course of a year. When we did not have e-mail capability blocked from single males, we probably received roughly 300 e-mails or so in less than a week from single males. I don't think I need to express the type of e-mails they sent, I'm sure everyone can figure it out for themselves. Of that 300, maybe three had something that made us pay attention.

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to do the math.

100 couples in one year = A dozen or so bad ones
300 single men in one week = three good ones

I have my instant messaging systems set on invisible for yahoo and my AIM account set where that if I don't have a name personally added to the list of friends, they can't see me period. Why? Single men, married cheaters, sex hounds.

That is WHY we don't care to be contacted by single men. If we want one, for sex, we will find them in avenues such as this board. There are a few single men on this site that we would not mind traveling the distance to meet, if only for nothing more than dinner. There are a few single men on this site that are a good representation of what we like in couples. There are a LOT of single men that have come through on this board that are as disgusting as the ones that contacted us in that 'one week' or via messaging services that we would NEVER want to meet.

A good case in point that you can find right here on this board is the Personals and Traveling Swingers forums. Take a stroll through them. How many are *single* men, vs. single women or couples? The mass majority are single men and of that majority you will see that they only ever posted one time. Read the content of their posts.... Enough said.

That is why we (OhioCouple) don't see single men in the lifestyle in a favorable light.

[OhioCouple]

I would also like to add that I have had the personal pleasure of chatting privately with several of the single guys on this board. One of them for well over a year. Some even have my personal e-mail address, my home phone and even my physical address and I don't give that out freely to even couples.

So I don't discriminate against single men, I just have a sour taste for single dweebs and couples that are dweebs.

(Is dweeb a word?)