Ethical Non Monogamy

[Spoomonkey]

Originally Posted by rpu3

Oh, whatever. Freakin' words. Like everything in these alternative lifestyles, it's personal choice and personal expression. I don't care what people call themselves; I just want the ability to label myself as I see fit.

Which was my original point anyway:

Originally Posted by Spoomonkey

As long as we (as a couple) get to enjoy the freedoms of sexual expression and the excitement of realizing fantasies, we can call it whatever... If we called it "tater totting" and it meant the same - I'd be cool with that...

So I guess we agree

The bottom line is that one term is no better than the other - it is not the label that makes the person, it is the person who makes the label. Just some labels say an awful lot about the person who slapped it on themselves

Swinging = Ethical Non-Monogamy = "tater totting"...

Six of one - half dozen of the other...

Spoomonkey

[rpu3]

Originally Posted by Spoomonkey

So I guess we agree

The bottom line is that one term is no better than the other - it is not the label that makes the person, it is the person who makes the label. Just some labels say an awful lot about the person who slapped it on themselves

Swinging = Ethical Non-Monogamy = "tater totting"...

Six of one - half dozen of the other...

Spoomonkey

I'm not so sure about the "agree" part. I think words are important and I feel the words we chose are not "semantics" but more descriptive of how we practice "alternative". You feel that some of these words are "jargon".

Both the spouse and I think there can be differences in the definitions; the words are not the same to us. After all, you are the one that understood our particular terms meant we'd "sleep around" without the other, which we would consider (which I have already explained in another thread). Hence, our penchant for using different words - it's not "dressing up" the word "swinging", it's trying to communicate our POV on our alternative activities. Whether or not the majority understands our terms is not important to us - enough people we have enjoyed meeting have understood.

I certainly understand that others choice of words and their definitions may equate various terms, while we just don't see it quite the same way. And with that, I officially give up. Which doesn't mean agree, at least to me.

[intuition897]

I dunno. I am a swinger. I practice responsible non-monogamy. I think I might have also described myself as "emotionally monogamous" when I have tried to explain the finer points of it. I like using those kinds of terms because they were the most suitable descriptors at the time. But for every person who agrees with you, at least two or three will disagree. I have never been able to successfully explain the nuances of our relationship or its merits to a vanilla person. And it ain't for a lack of tryin'. It's been a tough pill to swallow, but I think I've finally come to terms with the fact that you just can't convince someone of something if they don't want to change their minds.

[Spoomonkey]

Originally Posted by rpu3

Whether or not the majority understands our terms is not important to us - enough people we have enjoyed meeting have understood.

Yes - I changed this post...

The bottom line is that I see no value in using a term that needs even more explanation than the one it is replacing. Sounds like contract law to me.

But let me ask you this? What sort of topics would they discuss over on the "consensually-non-monogamous" board and how would they be different than what we discuss on the "swingers" board?

Words are swords, not surgical instruments. They never have been that exact. One word is just as much in need of a definition as the next. And the minute we have guys in gold medallions and too much Old Spice running around calling themselves "ethical non-monogamists" we'll have someone needing (to feel better about themselves) new terminology.

Spoomonkey

[prettylady]

OK, I am really confused here.
We are talking about the new political way of what to call ourselves.
This is a group who proudly displays the fact that they are sluts and "ho's" and we are worried about how to discribe what we do.
Your friend,
Prettylady

[flkeyscouple]

I think rpu3 stated very eloquently what she perceives the difference to be between terms for this lifestyle. I, too, hate the word 'swinging' because of the stereotypical thoughts it provokes in others. That being said, I use the term because it is understood. I like Intuition's term of "emotionally monogamous"! That's one I haven't heard and I plan to use in the future!

I don't think using these other terms makes one more 'high brow'. It's simply a preference. I do think "ethical non-monogamy" has a lot more thought to it than 'swinger'. Swinger to me still refers to 'wife swaping'.

To each their own, and the more power to those that feel more comfortable with more than one term! We all know that no matter the term, we all have fun! facelick

Sarah

[rpu3]

Originally Posted by Spoomonkey

Yes - I changed this post...

The bottom line is that I see no value in using a term that needs even more explanation than the one it is replacing. Sounds like contract law to me.

Fine - we agree that we don't agree. Again, vive la difference.

But it is humorous to me that you seem to understand my use of these particular terms perfectly, from the sleeping around without my spouse part to the contract law (not unusual given my profession).

[rpu3]

Originally Posted by prettylady

OK, I am really confused here.
We are talking about the new political way of what to call ourselves.
This is a group who proudly displays the fact that they are sluts and "ho's" and we are worried about how to discribe what we do.
Your friend,
Prettylady

I don't think this was a PC issue, nor do I think the article and the subsequent discussion was an attempt to change anything.

Personally, I was originally commentating that my spouse and I call ourselves a similar term as the article in question.

The author's choice was an attempt to get the ideology out into the mainstream.

Rebecca
The views expressed here are 100% opinion.

[prettylady]

**Prettylady hangs her head in shame**

I am sorry rup3. I was just meaning to be a smart ass. Insted perhaps I was just an ass.

Your friend?,
Prettylady

[rpu3]

Nah, Prettylady, no worries. Welcome to the bad side of written word, eh? Or too many written words? Or too many choices for words?

Although I like that beating emoticon.

[Spoomonkey]

Originally Posted by rpu3

But it is humorous to me that you seem to understand my use of these particular terms perfectly, from the sleeping around without my spouse part to the contract law (not unusual given my profession).

And I find it humorous that you originally said that "opportunist" means "friends first" in some exacting way

Ah well - some folks need their terms and I'll not begrudge them of that. Still I would love to know what difference you see in the terminology. As for me, I don't need to fluff my words to make me feel better. I am a swinger - because that communicates clearly. People know what it is without me needing to hand them a lexicon.

Spoomonkey

[gatorvol64]

When I read this article I came away with the idea that "ethical non monogamy" is an umbrella term the author was using to describe several forms of non-traditional relationships. Open marriages, swinging, poly relationships, etc. Even those that are just open to the idea if things were to fall in line a certain way. The "ethical" part was to convey it isn't the traditional form of non-monogamous either ... cheating. That all parties involved are aware and agree on the terms.

We can each call it something different but, it is what it is. And using the term most recognize is just the most realistic. If you feel the need to elaborate to others what that term may additionally mean to you as an individual/couple, I'm all in favor of your freedom to do so. But I think you have to realize, even if you use other words to convey swinging, it will eventually get broken down to it's base meaning that we can relate to ... swinging ... no matter the image or stereotype associated with it.

And really, who of us in the lifestyle should care about the image. We understand that it isn't accurate but we will never get those who aren't interested in understanding to recognize the image is incorrect. There are all kinds of things in this world that we may not like but just have to live with.

Vol

[Thrax]

Originally Posted by Spoomonkey

...I am a swinger - because that communicates clearly. People know what it is without me needing to hand them a lexicon."

This has been an interesting exercise in semantics.

This isn't a diss, but Spoo, I want to point out that you appear to be contradicting your earlier post: "Words are swords, not surgical instruments. They never have been that exact. One word is just as much in need of a definition as the next." If that's true, then the term "swinger" does NOT communicate clearly. And really those of us who have been on the Board for at least a year KNOW that just from reading some of the threads here.

Many people call Austin Powers a "swinger." Even though he's a fictional character, his "lifestyle" was a "swinging" lifestyle modeled after Swinging London of the late 1960s, when those hedonistic trendoids, many unmarried, were boffing each others brains out outside the bonds of marriage. They were called swingers, but many of them were single. We've had several go-rounds on this Board regarding whether singles in the "lifestyle" can be considered swingers, so I think the term "swinger" does NOT necessarily "communicate clearly."

Wikipedia, not the best source, but which appears to be okay regarding this definition, describes Swinging as, "...sometimes referred to in North America as the swinging lifestyle, is a non-monogamous sexual activity, treated much like any other social activity, that can be experienced as a couple... Swinging has been called wife swapping in the past, but this term is now archaic, as it is androcentric and does not accurately describe the full range of sexual activities that swingers may take part in...Typically, swinging activities occur when a married or otherwise committed couple engages with either another couple, multiple couples, or a single individual."

Similarly, rpu3 (and again, rpu3, this is not meant as a diss to you either) uses the term opportunists, which sounds negative to me. After all, single males have been referred to as a group using that term, and I get the sense that it's not in a positive sense. But she uses this term in what she thinks is a positive way for her and her spouse. Others might not think it's the best term to use. So? Maybe she uses that term and terms such as "consensual monogamy" to weed out the people that, although there might be a sexual connection, might not pass the ever-elusive "WE CLICK" test. Well, to each his or her or their own.

So yes, words can be swords, but is the swordsman wielding a slashing sabre or a pointed rapier? And surgical instruments should be sharp, but in some circumstances a surgeon must deal with the steel he or she has been dealt, and the patient must rely on the supposed skill of the surgeon. So, who is wielding the word "swinger" or "whatever-non-monogamist" term, and who are the partners/victims/patients? (THAT's not a good picture...physically OR [literally] literally. I know what I mean, but...let's just stop there.)

Enough of the metaphors though, and enough of this (s)wordplay. Time for dinner.

Or supper. Or the late evening meal.

Whatever. I'm hungry.

Thrax

[Spoomonkey]

Originally Posted by Thrax

This isn't a diss, but Spoo, I want to point out that you appear to be contradicting your earlier post: "Words are swords, not surgical instruments. They never have been that exact. One word is just as much in need of a definition as the next." If that's true, then the term "swinger" does NOT communicate clearly.

To quote one of my favorite movies: "Martin, it's all psychological. You yell barracuda, everybody says, "Huh? What?" You yell shark, we've got a panic on our hands on the Fourth of July." - Mayor Vaughn in Jaws (Yes, I have this on DVD)

Walk up to someone at work and use the word "ethical non-monogamy" - and then walk up to someone else and say "swinger". I have not tried this experiment myself, but I am fairly sure that you will form a much clearer picture in the head of the second person.

"Swinger" is a term that is readily understood. Yes - it was used in Austin Powers, but to be fair they weren't using much in the way of contemporary context. Does the term describe exactly the lifestyle choices of my wife and I? Not really - but it is a far better starting point as it is easily accessible, In my opinion.

Start with a colloquial word and you can explain, from common ground, the differences between the typical idea of what a swinger is - and what you are. Start with an uncommon word and you have to work yourself back to "swinger" first anyway to give people some point of reference.

I would say that - if you'll allow me a metaphor - starting with the word "swinging" is quick and to the point, like relatively non-invasive arthroscopic knee surgery. But starting with "ethical non-monogamy" is more akin to starting your surgery with a hack saw on the wrong leg entirely...



Spoomonkey

[lovinher]

Great debate!

Everyone knows what a sanitary engineer is and I think everyone would know what an ethical non-monogamous person would be if the term was used. Might make them think a bit though.

No matter how it's labeled it isn't going to change perceptions because the definition will still be the same. If swingers think the term "swingers" promotes a bad connotation then how could we expect the general population not to? The word is burned into our language and isn't about to go away. With only a very small percentage of the population "in the lifestyle" the negative attitude toward swinging will be around for a long time
Somebody said it is what it is....and it is....still swinging.