Jump to content

Pensacolapair

Registered
  • Content Count

    202
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    8

Pensacolapair last won the day on July 5 2019

Pensacolapair had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

394 Excellent

About Pensacolapair

  • Rank
    Educated Posterior
  • Birthday 10/18/1954

Personal Info

  • Relationship Status
    Couple - He (M) posts, She (G) vetoes as required
  • Location
    Florida
  • Interests
    Travel, sexy couples, classic cars, RV-ing
  • Occupation
    Retired
  • Swinging Experience
    20+ years

Swinger Info

  • SLS Name
    MandGinSD

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree that some general conversation is going to happen - and it's no big deal IMO. Like VegasLee, we refuse to go into detail about people we may know and will cut off others who try to go into detail about others. Just keep in mind that there are those who will push for more. The more people who don't give it to them will help towards reducing it. Unfortunately, people will always draw conclusions from certs. IMO, it's simply because there are so many different interpretations of certs. For example, we view certs as nothing more than one couple saying that they met another couple confirming that they have an interest in swinging beyond playing on a computer. Others view them as a 'who you've done' record. About the best thing anyone can do is develop and adhere to their own 'talk' policy - and basing it on that Golden Rule-thing would be a good starting point! M
  2. Okay - I'll bite. IMO..yes to both. Not reading into the questions and going on face value (using just what info is provided): "If a white woman does not have sex with black men because they are black is that racism?" In this case, the fact that the man is black is the only reason he is excluded from consideration. Nothing else is even put in the equation. If it were a pictureless profile that had no other info than "I am a black male", she has all the info she needs to eliminate him from consideration. He could in fact look like Hugh Jackman with a good tan - she could care less because he checks that block on the census that says 'black'. "If a white man wants to have sex with a black woman because she is black is that racism?" Again - The only reason he wants to have sex with her is because she is black. If it's a pictureless profile that had no other info other than "I am a black woman", she has his attention. She could in fact look like Rosie O'Donnell with a good tan and he'll still consider her. Both meet the criteria for 'racist' - Exclusion or inclusion based on race alone.
  3. @SWPACPL - Wow! That's scary! @ The Fuse - We hope your luck holds! And to clarify... my objection is more towards those who try to elicit a guarantee prior to an actual meet that if they show up, there will be play..regardless of anything. I'm not knocking anyone who, upon meeting with no expectations, turned out to be not be what we/they were looking for.
  4. Wow! It's been a while since I rambled here...but the weather has reached 'Pool Condition 1', so I use laptop-in-the-lounger as a way of not over-napping. (Gotta pace myself!) A recent topic that I responded to reminded me of something that has become increasingly annoying to us over the last few years - Swingers who are looking for guaranteed play. The first rule of swinging is 'No means No' - and an extension of that is, we have always thought, 'there is no circumstance that makes that null and void'. In other words, there are no guarantees. For example: We do not have a 'no play on first meet' rule, and have played on first meets probably more often than not. But there have been times when we didn't..and there will undoubtedly be more in the future. We were recently contacted by a couple who said early during the 'everyone-is-who-they-say-they-are' phone conversation that their playtime was limited and therefore they were looking for people who didn't have a problem with 'playing on a first date'. My wife replied that we had no such rule, provided everyone hit it off. The husband asked, rather nastily, "what does hit it off mean...? " We had them on speaker, so G looked at me, shook her head and walked out of the room. I simply told him that we appreciated the interest, but on second thought we didn't want to run the risk of wasting their time - and hung up. The phone rang a few minutes later.. we let it go to voicemail - the wife explaining that they had been jerked around before, and her husband didn't mean anything negative, yadi, yadi. Maybe we are too callous, but if you gotta ask what that means, we are obviously on 2 different channels. We have always thought that arranging a face-to-face meet meant that everyone likes everything so far...and want to see how far it can go. Where it goes is something that both parties determine as the situation develops. We've noticed a trend in online profiles towards less usable information, poor or no pictures and more declarations of a distaste for 'dating' as it's derisively called. Chatting online has somehow become an automatic bad thing. We don't want to do the online 'talk-dirty-to me' thing either - but it's very easy to spot when things are headed that way, and we have no problem abruptly ending such chats. "If you want to know more about us, just ask" is becoming a substitute for providing usable info in one's profile - but since they don't chat and oh-by-the-way consider more than one introductory email to be 'endless emails' (another frequently used profile term) - the only way to 'ask them' is to meet them somewhere in person. Let's see..don't know what you look like, and don't know what you are into - yet we are supposed to seriously consider you potential playmates for that night based on your word that you are a lot of fun and sexy as hell. Riiiight! Apparently we are fast becoming out of step with the rest of the swing community -are there really people who plan on playing regardless of anything that may present itself? Really? If we show up 50 pounds heavier than the people in the pictures on our profile? If one (or both) of us is sloppy drunk when you get there? If it's painfully obvious that our last collision with soap, water and toothpaste was far too long ago? If my response to your wife's 'Hi' is "Damn, I bet you can suck some serious dick!"? And no - these are not extremes conjured up to support my rant... they were all things that happened to cause us to say, "It ain't gonna work" to a few couples we have met over the years. Yes – I understand that people have other things going on in their lives. Yes, I understand that most people have to make arrangements in their schedules to facilitate hooking up with others (babysitters, weekend off, etc) Yes, I understand the cost of meeting someone can get up there, making it correspondingly frustrating if no play results. But am I off-base in saying that, unfortunately, all of these things come under the category of ‘the cost of doing business’? Or have I missed a major change in swinging etiquette to ‘If we agree to meet, we gotta play’? Damn…. I sure hope not!
  5. You make some good points, and in a perfect world where everyone checked their egos at the door, I would thank you and STFU. However - in that same perfect world, there would be a standard information set for profiles that everyone would adhere to and let the chips fall where they may. I cited extreme, unchangeable examples on purpose not only to be facetious,but also because the fact of the matter is that people routinely do not include 'deal-breakers' in their profile for any number of reasons they feel justify the omission. Not to pick on the OP, but as a quick example, take a look at their profile (I did) - there is a fair chance that if their profile stated that they were not attracted to blacks, they wouldn't have been contacted by the couple that 'why'd them in the first place! Unfortunately, not everyone interprets what they read the same way - it's the main handicap of the written word. And then there is that ol' ego thing I keep harping on. Go to the forum on Swing Lifestyle or any other ad site and look up any post that has using spellcheck as it's subject. Posters charge out of the woodwork in righteous indignation at the idea that they should actually spell better than a 2nd grader! As I understand it, it's some kinda infringement on their rights. The general consensus from them is that if you expect them to be able to effectively express themselves using the written word, you have a stick up your ass and aren't the kind of person they are looking for. Tell someone their photos make them look bad..? Check out any forum thread about photos - you don't think the pic of her sitting on the can first thing in the morning is sexy? Again, you have a stick up your ass and aren't the kind of person they are looking for. You may take constructive criticism well..but many,many others in the Lifestyle take any criticism as a personal assault by someone who 'thinks they are better than us'. It's one of the reasons that asking 'why' when told 'No thanks' became bad form/manners - because like sooooo many other things, the few knuckleheads gummed it up so bad that the masses decided it just wasn't worth the hassle. At face value, I can understand being frustrated/confused when a 'mirror profile' contacted results in a 'No thanks' - for about 10 seconds. Perhaps I am too shallow, but there have been couples who have contacted us who, on paper, were a perfect match profile-wise... and we said 'No Thanks'. Why..? Looked at their pics, and what she, me, or we saw just didn't float our boat. No, it wasn't always a bad photo, and in some instances were actually people most would consider attractive - But... I think the current phrase is, we 'just wasn't feelin' it'. I'm fairly confident that many here would say "Been there!" How helpful of a response would that be to 'why'? Not very..but that's all there is, and it is what it is. I totally agree that it's difficult to craft one's profile without some sort of feedback. There are good sources of feedback on one's profile. A long time ago, we learned to ask those that we had gotten to know in the Lifestyle to critique ours...and they in turn asked us to do theirs. IMO, there is less inclination to get defensive. For newbies who have not met folks they are that comfortable with yet - this board as well as forums on other sites have 'Profile review' threads that, from what I have seen, are very good at giving outside perspective on profiles. I've been impressed at how many times others saw the same good and bad points I did - but put it in a much more tactful manner than I could.
  6. Um..how? "Why?" -- Their answer: "She is 5' 10" tall and prefers men taller than her". If you are 5'6" tall, are you going to grow another 5 inches or so and hit them back with, "how about now"..? "Why?" -- Their answer: "He likes women with larger breasts". Are you going to get your wife a boob job and hit them back with, "How about now"..? "Why?" -- Their answer: "She likes well-endowed men, and from your nude pics you don't qualify". Do you know of a new procedure that will pump a 6-incher up to a 12 incher that you plan on getting and then hitting them back with, "How about now"...? "Why?" -- Their answer: "We are not attracted to blacks". Are you going to bleach your skin, surgically alter your features and wear a wig, then hit them back with, "How about now"..? I'm seriously not trying to ridicule anyone ... I'm just trying to get some clarification on how asking and getting an answer to 'why' is helpful. The examples I used above are probably the more likely ones that would be encountered..and what they have in common is that changing them would require extraordinary measures which,of course, rational people aren't going to do. What really happens in response to answers such as this is that they invite further dialouge, rebuttal, and/or negotiations. "Why?" -- Their answer: "She is 5' 10" tall and prefers men taller than her". Rebuttal: "When we are prone, height is irrelevant and I have a big dick." "Why?" -- Their answer: "He likes women with larger breasts". Rebuttal: "Anything over a handful is a waste and she can suck-start a Harley." "Why?" -- Their answer: "She likes well-endowed men, and from your nude pics you don't qualify". Rebuttal: "It's not the size of the boat, but the motion of the ocean and I eat pussy like a champ." "Why?" -- Their answer: "We are not attracted to blacks". Rebuttal:" That is racist and once you go black, you won't go back". The responses can go on for quite some time - but I promise you that unless the originators of the 'No thanks' are total pushovers, it's going to come back to 'We aren't interested and we ain't gonna fuck you'. I have had others point out that sometimes there are things that turn off others that are easily changed. Examples: Men with facial hair, women wearing sexy clothing, full swap only, soft swap only,shaved below the belt/not shaved below the belt, etc. I'll concede that point...but then ask If you really want to go there. I had this conversation with some lifestyle acquaintances who did want to go there. Both of the guys really enjoyed giving women facials..something my wife and I aren't particularly into (tried it a couple of times between ourselves over the years and found it more humorous than erotic). I knew that both of these guys wives didn't do anal, so I simply asked them, "If G lets you give her a facial, can I fuck your wives in the ass?" Of course, the answer was 'no'. I see... so G is 'spoda do something she isn't into - but your wives aren't? Interesting concept....! (NOT!) Everyone has one or two 'no's...and they are not an abbreviation for 'No, ask me if I might make an exception for you'. Perhaps I've missed something over the years, but isn't one of the great things about swinging is that it's all about finding someone whose thing matches your thing and having fun playing with each other's things? If their thing doesn't match your's -- move on to the next thing and if you need to, take solace in the fact that their thing isn't 'one-size-fits-all' ... they get told 'No thanks' too. M
  7. Biting can ruin a good BJ, as can hitting bad bridgework...but I'm surprised that my number one dick-wilter hasn't been mentioned - The dreaded nut-twister!! Lick the boys, sure...caress the boys..by all means... suck the boys ... cool. But tie them into a knot and try to pick me up by them - Houston, we have a problem!
  8. Sorry, DE_BBC, but that's the same thing I got out of your posted statements. And unfortunately, it's a point of view that far too many people of all colors try to make fly nowadays. It's no different than the contention that it's okay for me to use the N-word because I happen to be black - but if a member of any other race uses it, it's akin to burning a cross on the lawn. If one expects the argument that someone whose sole reason for not considering sex with someone because of their race is a racist to fly, then someone whose sole reason for considering sex with someone because of their race is also a racist. Just because one happens to work out to their advantage doesn't factor into the equation. The number one reason we personally have told others 'No Thanks' when approached is simply a lack of sexual attraction either by me, her or both of us. Easily the second most frequent reason (even with those we did think were sexually attractive) was they let us know that they were not the kind of people we care to be around - namely those who relate to others as individuals instead of merely representatives of a particular group. We have turned down white couples whose profiles are plastered with statements of how much she loves black cock. We have turned down couples who told us they have always wanted to fuck a black man/woman. We have turned downed black couples who said they will do white women but not white men. We don't go to any parties advertised as 'interracial' or 'Black-Only'. Another big turn-off has been popping up a lot lately: "We have been looking for a black couple for a long time"... including a couple of groups. As several posters have already pointed out - the issue of race is a complicated one. And IMO, one that has an amazing ability to wrap itself in a 50/50 mix of emotionalism and bullshit to repel all logic. But within the lifestyle, it actually funnels down into a much easier to handle issue. Who we choose to have sex with is one of the few true choices we have. It's also one of the few things where "Because I don't wanna" is a perfectly acceptable, inarguable answer. Like everyone else, I have my views on race.. and at an appropriate time in a appropriate venue, I can debate it with anyone so inclined. But to those who choose to bring up the issue as a handy-dandy, one-size-fits-all rant as to why someone doesn't want to get with you, I submit: Uh Huh - and by pointing that out, you hope to accomplish...? Within the lifestyle, has the result of such a conversation ever been, "I have seen the light and now I find you incredibly hot..when can we get together?" Despite your well-thought out, eloquently expressed, heart-felt opinion - - they still ain't gonna fuck ya! Wouldn't one's time be better spent by simply moving to the next sexy person to whom you might be exactly what they are looking for? I apologize to the OP for straying from your original question - but look at this and the other strays off topic as more justification supporting my original suggestion to just block those who feel 'No Thanks' requires further clarification. (see how neatly I tied that in..)
  9. What they both said... As several have already responded - you gotta do what works for you! To answer your specific questions: The way we see it, everyone sets their limits for play. I suspect that many couples are like we are in that our limits for play with others are different from those for our personal play - in other words, there are things that I can do with her that other guys can't and vice versa. So going into a play situation, certain things are already 'off the menu' so to speak. However, for us, removing vaginal sex from the menu is like going to a steakhouse that will provide all the side orders, but ya gotta bring your own steak! It's just so much easier to go to a steakhouse that has steak too. Doesn't mean we have to eat steak - but if we're still hungry after the salad bar - various cuts are available.So we too don't knowingly hook up with couples who are only soft-swap. I put knowingly in there because, we have met couples who thought it was okay to not reveal that they were soft-only until game time. Early in our swinging journey, we tried it once and didn't like it. Since then, we have treated it as their being less than honest and took our ball and went home. As to would we soft-swap hoping that eventually another couple would 'come around' to our way of play...? Absolutely not - we aren't going to change our style of play so why should we expect someone else to change their's? For us, this is about finding pieces that already fit - not reshaping those that don't. Now..should they change their style of play further down the line and approach us again - it's all good!
  10. On Swing Lifestyle, we have several full-length pictures with faces pixilated that are viewable by all members (public). A couple of her, a couple of him, and one of us together. With the exception of the pixilated faces, the pictures are recent, clear, and not shot from 500 meters away without a zoom lens. The rest of our pictures are in private galleries. If we contact another couple, we enclose the picture of us together without the face pixilated in the 'Hello' email. If someone contacts us, and we are interested, we enclose that same picture. We sometimes get 'Hello' emails from others where they have opened one of their private galleries as part of their introduction. Again, if we are interested, we have a private gallery that we open in turn. AMEN! Isn't it funny how so many think the 'wife-as-bait' thing works? M
  11. For us, it's an easy 'No..and never will'. Simply put, those we have sex with in the Lifestyle represent different - as in a change of pace. That's why we swing! Their technique or 'equipment' may be different, or they might toss in something new - but it will always be missing the race-winning element: the intense emotional connection that we have with each other. We can have fantastic, mind-blowing, near-nirvana-like sex with someone else and afterwards eclipse it with each other. I know, I know..I'm just a S.N.A.G, but it's worked for us 'lo these many years. M
  12. The issue of racism within the Lifestyle is one of the many 'chicken-egg' style arguments one will encounter - by that I mean that there is no definitive answer, it will always be based on which side of the coin you happen to see it from..with ample justification and supporters available for whatever side of the debate one might be on. As a topic to debate, it's just as viable as any other - but it will never over-ride the fact that who you want to have sex with is no one's choice but your's. In my opinion, people who ask 'why' when given 'No' as an answer simply never considered that 'No' was an answer they might get. This, I suspect, is for one of 2 reasons: 1. They think that they are 'all that' - and that everyone will be chomping at the bit to get with them. 2. They think that swinging is about getting with anyone who asks Whichever of the two might apply, it boils down to the fact that their lil ego was bruised because they were rejected and those who lead with their ego will always attempt to create a justification for said rejection that places blame on the rejector. The only thing you did 'wrong', IMHO, was in answering their question as to why you said 'No'. By doing so, you foster the idea that explanations are owed for 'No'... and they simply are not - ever! Swing Lifestyle has a great tool for dealing with knuckleheads who carry conversations beyond 'No Thanks' - the Block button. M
  13. Hmm..we see this issue from a different angle than apparently many do. My wife and I have nothing sexual that we won't do for each other...we've tried quite a bit and anything either of us really liked became permanant items in our playbook. Personally, I think it's because we really enjoy seeing each other seriously into whatever is being done at any particular time. If someone doesn't want to swallow, do anal, or anything else - that is definatly their prerogative - no one should ever do anything that they don't want to. But keep in mind that it's a sword that cuts both ways. We feel for you if there is something you like that your partner isn't game for, we really do - but not enough to share your pain..perhaps it's a flaw in our character. We actually have a line in our online profile that says, "we won't do anything for you that your own partner won't do". Why? Over the years we've encountered a few too many couples who have 'don't go there' issues within their sexual relationship - and the solution they've come up with is to ask others to settle for less enjoyment so that one of them can get a fix the other isn't willing to provide. The way we look at it, with the exception of physical restrictions, what 'something your partner won't do for you' comes down to is 'something your partner won't do for someone else either'. Follow along here: If, say for example, my wife swallows - wouldn't it be a safe bet that I enjoy having my load swallowed? Why would/should I put myself in a position to have to settle for something less than I enjoy so that some other guy can get what he is already used to not having? Selfish? Um.. if so, then the guy enjoying what his wife ain't gonna do with me is standing under that same banner with me! Sorry..but that's not far away from 'my wife won't fuck me, but she doesn't mind if someone else does' I once had a blissfully clueless fellow point out a particular wife at a party and confide in me that "She'll do anal! That's where me and the other guy's whose wives won't do anal plug in at!" How quaint... M
  14. Sometimes soft is fine..truth be told, there are often times (both between ourselves or with others) when G just wants to give head! But what is or isn't fair game should be established upfront. Unfortunatly, the majority of 'soft-swappers' we've met have been of this variety... and it didn't come out until things were underway. Sorry, but we see that as simply being dishonest. We've had no problem telling them that we are the original 'equal opportunity' couple and it just ain't gonna happen. M
×
×
  • Create New...