(Closed) We are swingers – ask away!

posted 7 years ago in Intimacy
Post # 167
Member
1621 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2012

View original reply
@CherryL:  Well I certainly didn’t intend to rub anyone the wrong way and I don’t I implied that *any* kind of relationship works for everyone.  Social evolution is just the observence of sociocultural change over time, it has no inherent value judgement nor was I speaking about non-monogamous relationships being “better” than monogamous ones. In that sense, it would be an evolution if non-monogamous long-term commited relationships were viewed as a viable and acceptable option to that of monogamous marriage/relationships. That is all. 

Also, I said, “sometimes”.  In other words, when I think of the social implications of swinging, etc. (ie. long term non-monogamous pairings), part of me can at least appreciate that it could potentially be a benefit to some and it could also address some pretty serious cultural fractures eg. a 50% infidelity rate in North American marriages.  It’s just thinking and exploring the topic, don’t get all twisted up about it.  I guess I’m saying that I can intellectually explore the idea without value judgements and try to see both the merits and the drawbacks.  Since we, in general, focus mostly on the drawbacks, it’s more of a mental stretch to find the merits.  And….in a culture rife with infidelity and the failure of a large proportion of marriages, I can imagine a time in the future where people can healthily and happily and openly engage in non-monogamous relationships (to a greater extent than is typical today) that might actually work better for them, if only they could work through the moral/social messages that it’s “bad”.  

Second, I never said that it is a benefit to all/most relationships, although it clearly is a system that works for some relationships.  I was neither speaking of my own personal beliefs, nor yours or anyone elses in particular.  Hey, what works for some will never work for all….evolutionary process included if we’re being honest.  

And no, I never said that anyone who doesn’t live a non-monogamous lifestyle is “missing out” or “behind the times”, nor that it’s best for everyone.  I’m in a monogamous marriage and have zero intent or desire otherwise.  I think you’re taking something personally that wasn’t personal at all.

 

Post # 168
Member
1309 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: December 2011

View original reply
@TwoCityBride:  I totally get what you are saying. In a perfectly designed comparison, Person B (the committed-sex-only one) definitely has some potential pitfalls for her decision-making.

In reality person A as you describe him or her is fairly rare. Unfortunately in terms of statistics, high risk behaviors tend to go together – people who have lots of sex partners also tend to do things like mix drugs or alcohol with sex, have anonymous intercourse, have anal sex, and so forth. There’s actually some research that suggests it’s a particular personality type that drives this, or the way some people are biologically built to experience sensation and impulsivity. Person B, who is extremely cautious and risk averse in his/her partner selection, tends to carry that caution over to testing, condom use and so forth.

 

Post # 169
Member
253 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: April 2015

View original reply
@cdncinnamongirl:  

 

” it can be the best of both worlds and an asset to a long term relationship, not a burden.  Sometimes I think that polyamory and swinging are the next social evolution of long term relationships.”

 

 

 

Thats what you wrote. That it can be the best of both worlds. What worlds exactly? Having multiple partners is not something I’d consider to be in a best world scenario for myself, some ppl would like that, others would not. Also ‘of long term relationships’ implies all. You did not say ‘ I think it can help some relationships where the people involved do not feel monogamy fits them’. You said ‘next social evolution’. Well for one thing polyamoury and pologamy in general have been around for thousands of years so its not a new social evolution, its an old one, it began to go on the decrease with the rise of the agricultural period. You said ‘sometimes’ as in from time to time you think this, not sometimes as in ‘in some cases’.

 

Also I would not say that swinging would fix couples that are going through cheating. Thats comparing swinging to cheating and it is not the same. If a couple is already having trust issues, swinging is not going to help them. The cheater is probably not going to follow the rules set forth in their swinging relationship anymore than he did his monogamous one.

 

 

 

Post # 170
Member
1621 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2012

View original reply
@CherryL:  Ok well we’ll agree to disagree. No point in further discussion.

Post # 171
Member
3569 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: April 2013

double post

 

 

Post # 172
Member
3569 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: April 2013

View original reply
@Magdalena:  

 

The problem is that you are making assumptions about what kind of person has a lot of sex and a lot of partners. You seem to think they are more “high risk” and have issues with drugs and alcohol. Which is really stereotyping, and also making assumptions about what kind of “person” would behave that way.

 The fact of the matter is if someone is engaging in high risk behaviors, it’s not based on their numbers of partners, it’s based on themselves. Meaning if they are reckless, have issues with drugs and alcohol, and are engaging in other behaviors because of self-esteem or personal problems; of course they are going to behave that way during sex. However if someone is educated about their health, and doesn’t have issues with engaging in high risk behaviors, even if they have a lot of partners they aren’t likely to behave recklessly in their sex life.

Also when I worked for a nonprofit for a few years after college working with teenage and young women typically in their early to mid-20s, I found with people in monogamous long term relationships, there were huge issues. It’s not because they are monogamous, it’s because due to their monogamy they tend to get tested less, tend use birth control over condoms, tend to not ask for their partners sexual health and don’t get tested before becoming sexually active with their partners. So even if they have only had a few partners, and their spouse only had a few partners, they still pose a significant risk to each other. They also tended to be more complacent about that fact. In fact we had a program and presentations just for those people, because it obviously an issue.  We also had programs for people who weren’t monogamous so I’m not saying there weren’t issues there, because they were but you be surprised at the  fact that is really isn’t a huge difference in risky behaviors between the two groups.

But I learned so much as sex and young women, and for me it really opened my eyes. There were so many other shocking things I learned particularly about what kind of teens were engaging in high risk behaviors.

ps: A lot of people in monogamous relationships have anal sex now, certainly more then in previous generations.

Post # 173
Member
1309 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: December 2011

View original reply
@TwoCityBride:  it’s not really assumptions, although I understand why it may come off that way.

Drug and especially alcohol use is heavily linked with multiple sex partners and other high risk behaviors, not for all individuals of course, but for the category.

Somebody who has sex with 20 people and uses a condom every time is still going to be considered high risk, from a medical perspective, compared to someone who has sex with 1 person and doesn’t wear a condom. Because from a math perspective, their risk is simply higher. It just is, even if they are Safe Sex Superman/woman and use condoms flawlessly every. single.time. And it’s at that macro level that we have to make health policy, because it’s the macro level driving our costs.

Unless you test someone and wait 8 weeks before having sex with them, you don’t know whether that person has syphilis or HIV (HIV can take even longer in rare cases, actually). Few individuals who have high risk sex demand that their potential partners do testing that thorough – it’s more common to do risky things like pick people up at clubs or on spring vacation. In these situations people are gambling everything on the condom staying in one piece. In the USA it costs a health insurance company more than $20,000 per year to keep one HIV+ person alive.

Post # 174
Member
3569 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: April 2013

View original reply
@Magdalena: 

My whole point is that correlation doesn’t imply causation. You keep saying that drug use and alcohol use is linked with multiple partners. I can tell you empathically that isn’t true. What drug and alcohol use is linked with is risker sex.  

To make it clear, DRUGS and Alcohol aren’t linked with people who have a high number of partners; it’s linked with to people who have risker sex due to their use of drugs and alcohol.

 

Again my point isn’t that everyone who has a lot of partners is a shining example of having safe sex; it is that you should be judging this on the behavior of individuals not on their numbers of their partners. I know plenty of people who have a low number of partners, who have had one night stands, which is my point. It is based on individual.

You can’t class and group all people who have a high number of partners with particular behavior when it simply isn’t true. What you should be grouping them by is the behavior, meaning instead of what you having been saying: People who have a lot of partners are associated with risker sexual behavior and drugs and alcohol. This again simply isn’t true. What is true:  People who have issues with drugs and alcohol are more likely to engage in risker sexual behavior. (has nothing to do with the amount of partners a person may have)

People who have a high number of partners aren’t a monolithic group. The same way people who have a low amount of partners aren’t a monolithic group as well. Even drug and alchol abusers or addicts aren’t a monolithic group.

But the infomation and studies on drug and or alchol use during or before a sexual encounter is very clear, and it shows that they have a tremoundous effect on what happens during a sexual encounter that conclusivly shows that having sex while using them is infinitely risker.

Post # 175
Member
2358 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: December 2014

@swingerbee:  How do you deal with the possibility that your husband may feel this opens up other possibilities? Like doing things without your knowledge?

I know a swinger couple.  They have the same rules as you do.

The husband doesn’t follow those rules and the wife doesn’t know.  He’s said he figures if she’s okay with them “dating” a girl together, then why not him alone.

Post # 177
Bee
979 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: September 2008 - A tiny town just outside of Glacier National Park

View original reply
@RenoSweeney24:  Cheating exists in the framework of open relationships as well. There may be more room for negotiation or exploration, but breaking the rules or going behind someone’s back can still happen and, of course, is just as devastating. Just like in any other relationship, you expect that your boundaries are respected… it’s just that you have different boundaries and these rules may be more open to discussion.

Post # 178
Member
881 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: March 2014

View original reply
@swingerbee:  If you are still answering questions I have one! 

What do you consider cheating in your relationship? I imagine the parameters have to be a tad different to incorporate the lifestyle so I was just wondering how you and your hubby define cheating? Would it be any activity breaking your rules at a swingers club or any physical contact with a non swinger or lying about the contact you do have with others? Just curious! Thanks for sharing! 

Post # 180
Member
1934 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: March 2014

View original reply
@Magdalena:  I think you’ve made your point (20x over) on this thread.  Start a new one if you really want to argue that everyone more sexually active than you deserves to be paying more for insurance.  You seem intelligent enough to know that there’s no way to put controls on this type of behavior.  Not to mention, people with multiple partners are not the END ALL of our insurance issues, which I’m sure you also know but the way you continue on with this argument makes it sure seem that way.

Post # 181
Member
4697 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: September 2014

View original reply
@iloverocks:  Neither of them are sleeping around, did you even read her responses? Intimacy comes in all forms and its so closed minded to attempt to discredit what she has with her husband because you think everyones marriage should fit your ideal.

OP, thanks for sharing. I think your relationship is incredibly interesting, very supportive yet so different from what the majority thinks is the norm. I’ll admit I always thought the whole concept of ‘swinging’ sounded so complicated, but what you’ve described and shared seems remarkably simple and truthfully, not all that different from a typical monogomous relationship.

The topic ‘We are swingers – ask away!’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors