Leaderboard

two42lovers, You made some beautiful points (and used existential in a sentence, always impressive). I do tend to be a little reactionary about being defined by others, so I'll put some serious thought into the points you brought up, and I appreciate you putting the "practicing physician" spin on it. I think that the overall point to what I was trying to get across is that, regardless of what we (the people posting in this particular thread) define as swingers, the essence of whether the OP is a "swinger" or not is basically going to be defined by the OP's perception of what he is, perhaps in concurrence with a matching perception of the couple he is engaged with at the time. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think I can sit back and point at the OP and say "yes, he's a swinger" or "no, he's not" without enteracting with him on a sexual level, with the foreknowledge and consent of my honey. I tend to percieve whether someone is a swinger or not by how they handle dealing with both partners, whether it's simply being considerate enough to bring the absent partner a nice cigar as a way of saying thank you for the quality time with your spouse, or whether it's by taking an active part in playtime with both partners. Text is such a difficult medium to convey meaning in, and I seriously doubt my ability to really get across what I mean, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that since I can't define the OP's "label", I'm not really sure how anyone else could, being as that there are so many different perceptions of what the label "swinger" means. So, basically what I'm trying to convey to the OP is... Congrats on all your self-searching, and self-education. Your attempts to find answers are commendable, and asking others in the lifestyle is definitely the best source for information that you'll find. However, take the wisdom that you find here and elsewhere, and use it to decide for yourself. It is what it is, and you are what you are. Hope that helps clear it up, and thanks ya'll for not throwing soap at the hippy, I promise I'll be back to my old (non-existential, lol) "corporate whore" personna by the next post.

Interesting thoughts - also interesting to hear the various ways people read the various posts. Only goes to remind us words mean what the hearer thinks they mean, not what the speaker thinks or intends. That works if you see "swinging" in terms of a personal philosopy independant of actions, but not so well if "swinging" means specific behaviors. If you say you are a doc because you went to med school, then yes, you are a doctor. But instead of the word "doctor" try using the term "practicing physician". (Changes the whole point of the statement, and no, you would not be a practicing physician if you have never seen a patient. Yes, we can call anybody anything, but no, just because someone is a "cowboy" in their own mind doesn't mean they are a cowboy who works with cattle. If we're having a round-up and we need cowboys, we need real cowboys -lol!) But we have to pay attention to other people's definitions. Swinging involves an agreement bewteen people to have sex. The way people define it is all-important. Suppose a couple see's themselves as "swingers" but they have never played. If you ask them "are you swingers?" their "yes" is going to mean something very different than if you asked the same question to a couple who actually plays. People come to SB to think about and discuss swinging. To say everyone has their own definition, and no definition is any better than another, is a judgemental statement. It cuts off people from discussing, and implies anyone who chooses not to be existential in their approach is bad and wrong. In our opinion, a single who knows how to play well with a couple is worth their weight in gold. Whether a single is in that catagory, and what defines it, is what this thread is about. The OP asks some good questions. Defining what swinging is, and how/if singles fit, is worthwhile because it gives everyone a chance to think things through, hear from others, and perhaps come to a better, more thoughtful pespective.

i'm new, so take this with a grain of salt....but i'd feel it would be more weird not to say "thanks" if you had a good time. i would email (instead of calling), and wait a couple days. then send something short and sassy like "wow, thanks for the great night...hubby and i are still talking about it. hope to see you around again!" I wouldn't say "hey can we meet next friday?" but i don't think it's clingy to say you hope to play with them again.

Take the overhead costs (gas, car payments, car & health insurance, plastic surgery, teeth whitening, baby sitter, condoms, lube, etc.) out of the picture and the event costs (dinner, drinks, tips, door charges, etc.) should be "dutch". Only the cost of any required accommodations to do the deed(hotel room, limo backseat rental, gas for the plane or boat, cabin rental, private theater booth, etc.) should be equally split between the parties not the individuals (per capita). Keep the balance with the monies and you keep the balance of the fun. When everyone goes home minus the same amount of cash, then everyone tends to remain friends later. When free dinner & drinks are the reward some will moan as you need to hear to keep the grattis going with each stroke to pillage your wallet the next time. And not everyone has the disposal income of some, so each person's pride is preserved with a little dignity of paying their own way.