FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > How can one be monogamous
How can one be monogamous
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No no no "No no no.... yes? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed by poster at 24/05/14 18:38:34]" That is what I was wondering. I mean you could for example really love a person and still have sex with others without betraying that love? I am not talking about doing things behind partner's back here.. just to clarify beforehand! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed by poster at 24/05/14 18:38:34]That is what I was wondering. I mean you could for example really love a person and still have sex with others without betraying that love? I am not talking about doing things behind partner's back here.. just to clarify beforehand!" okay Thats fine but it ain't fucking monogamy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having a faithful heart is monogamy... having recreational sex with others is swinging. "Succinctly put!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed by poster at 24/05/14 18:38:34]That is what I was wondering. I mean you could for example really love a person and still have sex with others without betraying that love? I am not talking about doing things behind partner's back here.. just to clarify beforehand!" Yes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having a faithful heart is monogamy... having recreational sex with others is swinging.
Succinctly put! " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You can't remain monogamous but you can remain faithful. I believe in fidelity without monogamy in mutually consensual relationships. As soon as one partner has a problem with it then it ends - the fidelity is the important thing to retain. " no no no you ain't faithful even if you have a movie night and show what you been doin | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Perhaps 'soft' play would enable the monogamy to stay in place? I suppose it comes down to your definition of monogamy, i.e. whether it's one partner for any intimate activity, fill on sexual penetration, or emotional based intimacy. Some people i know consider kissing someone else to be breaking monogamy, others only consider full vaginal penetration to break monogamy, some consider emotional or mental intimacy, even lacking in physical contract, to break monogamy. It's a thought provoking question, though it'll likely fall into the 'to each his own' category of answers. " Perhaps a personal matter of what a couple defines as being monogamous. Maybe therein lies the answer? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
.I've took an honesty pill tonight please take this into consideration before anyone gets on to me and tries to make me feel bad .i cant help it. .should be worn off by morning..thank you for your consideration tarts oops sorry see | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guess it's a tricky one... Mentally I am committed and happy with one man, it's just that we enjoy sex with others Rubyx" I like this one! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life " There has been an argument on that very theory for a long time. Many who are of a more scientific mindset believe that the idea of monogamy is quite recent in terms of human history and due to religious reasons..... And that the ideology of monogamy actually runs contrary to survival of the species. There are many animals that are argued to be monogamous that actually aren't. They may be for a limited period of time but if a new partner is needed because the first was no longer a viable breeding candidate then they will move on. It's instinctive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having a faithful heart is monogamy... having recreational sex with others is swinging. "I agree... I am faithful to one man... We have our understanding and know each other well... Communication and trust are important... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having a faithful heart is monogamy... having recreational sex with others is swinging.
I agree... I am faithful to one man... We have our understanding and know each other well... Communication and trust are important... "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I'm not saying free love is an easy path to take...but it is the most loving and most spiritual imo | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Placing your winky in only one flower is monogamy,or any other orifice but from the one owner... Oki doki "wee willi winkie..  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP are you suggesting that monogamy is not necessarily monomorphic ? "That sounds like something you would find in a biology lesson | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Placing your winky in only one flower is monogamy,or any other orifice but from the one owner... Oki doki wee willi winkie.. "if Thats a challenge for a winky off where we show our winky to female judges to judge who has the wee willy winky and who has the better willy winy i accept your challenge sir by the way bale has scored | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guess it's a tricky one... Mentally I am committed and happy with one man, it's just that we enjoy sex with others Rubyx I like this one! " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Having a faithful heart is monogamy... having recreational sex with others is swinging. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life " It occured to me the other day that most of the patriarchal religions have a monogamous doctrine because if you look elsewhere in nature, males are fairly surplus and certainly don't need to exist in a 1:1 ratio with women, monogamy means more men are needed in the world..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life It occured to me the other day that most of the patriarchal religions have a monogamous doctrine because if you look elsewhere in nature, males are fairly surplus and certainly don't need to exist in a 1:1 ratio with women, monogamy means more men are needed in the world....." we will never need more men in the world  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life It occured to me the other day that most of the patriarchal religions have a monogamous doctrine because if you look elsewhere in nature, males are fairly surplus and certainly don't need to exist in a 1:1 ratio with women, monogamy means more men are needed in the world..... we will never need more men in the world "Depends if they're hot... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life It occured to me the other day that most of the patriarchal religions have a monogamous doctrine because if you look elsewhere in nature, males are fairly surplus and certainly don't need to exist in a 1:1 ratio with women, monogamy means more men are needed in the world..... we will never need more men in the world
Depends if they're hot... "Good point..ok,we will never need more not hot men in the world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life It occured to me the other day that most of the patriarchal religions have a monogamous doctrine because if you look elsewhere in nature, males are fairly surplus and certainly don't need to exist in a 1:1 ratio with women, monogamy means more men are needed in the world..... we will never need more men in the world
Depends if they're hot...
Good point..ok,we will never need more not hot men in the world " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"OP are you suggesting that monogamy is not necessarily monomorphic ? "OP is not suggesting anything... OP is just guilty of asking a question | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and still be a "swinger" in the broadest sense of the word? I mean is it possible to swing with different partners and yet still be monogamous? "Nope! Not in the strictest sense of the word. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed by poster at 24/05/14 18:38:34]That is what I was wondering. I mean you could for example really love a person and still have sex with others without betraying that love? I am not talking about doing things behind partner's back here.. just to clarify beforehand!" Nothing wrong with it if partner ok with it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm old fashioned when it comes to monogamous relationships. To me you share yourself heart, body and mind with one person and no one else."
I must say though that I'm almost envious of happily married swinging couples but I don't think it's something I could personally handle. Make of that what you will. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm old fashioned when it comes to monogamous relationships. To me you share yourself heart, body and mind with one person and no one else.
I must say though that I'm almost envious of happily married swinging couples but I don't think it's something I could personally handle. Make of that what you will. "I didn't think I could handle a monogamous relationship again either, but you know what? With the right person it's amazing... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A mahogamous relationship?" mahog games us...its that japanese matching pairs game. ..no? Lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm old fashioned when it comes to monogamous relationships. To me you share yourself heart, body and mind with one person and no one else.
I must say though that I'm almost envious of happily married swinging couples but I don't think it's something I could personally handle. Make of that what you will.
I didn't think I could handle a monogamous relationship again either, but you know what? With the right person it's amazing..."Absolutely, I meant sharing that partner with another man (it's early, I probably worded it strangely), I really don't think I could handle that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A mahogamous relationship? mahog games us...its that japanese matching pairs game. ..no? Lol" I thought we were talking tree love... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm old fashioned when it comes to monogamous relationships. To me you share yourself heart, body and mind with one person and no one else.
I must say though that I'm almost envious of happily married swinging couples but I don't think it's something I could personally handle. Make of that what you will. "I've always said that I could never do that either. This is something I do as a single and can't ever imagine doing it as a couple. If I ever met anyone again I'd be deleting my profile. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm old fashioned when it comes to monogamous relationships. To me you share yourself heart, body and mind with one person and no one else.
I must say though that I'm almost envious of happily married swinging couples but I don't think it's something I could personally handle. Make of that what you will. "Interesting views. I note your use of "almost" Libertine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Treesome! " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting views. I note your use of "almost" Libertine. "Hah! Well, it's not something I'd want to do so I don't think I can be fully envious if that makes sense? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting views. I note your use of "almost" Libertine.
Hah! Well, it's not something I'd want to do so I don't think I can be fully envious if that makes sense? "Absolutey! We are what we are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Treesome! "out on a limb otherwords you,ll have to branch out more.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's always..."I don't think I could share my partner with someone else"..."I I I I"...never a thought about the partner. Once you begin to notice where that voice is coming from...that it's your own selfish jealously controlling side speaking...then any nobility the sentiment may have carried dissolves. It's basically a twist on the prisoners dilemma...two people each hoping for personal happiness...but not wanting it for their partner so each making detrimental choices for the other out of mock 'love' in order to ensure they are both mutually unhappy and imprisoned. Whilst it may seem noble to prevent your partner from fucking another person where does it stop...should they not kiss another person...should they not flirt with other people...should they not let another person touch them...should they not show themselves to another person??? It really is a quagmire of control and manipulation...all based upon the fact that you can't overcome your own jealousy...not really very spiritual or noble at all. So yes...I can understand how difficult it might be to imagine letting your partner get fucked by someone else...but what you do is just start on the smaller stuff...see whether you'll let her watch someone else...or show herself to someone else...and go from there. That's why the whole singles side of FAB, with it's endless drive towards shagging, isn't really very complimentary to the needs of a couple sensitively trying to explore the waters of swinging...where really the penetrative sex part is best left until a much later stage...when you've got your head around the idea of letting your partner have fun and dealt with your own jealousy issues. As for Monogamy...Surely it's either that or Polygamy. As the 'amy' bit seems to refer to love (amorous I presume)...you'd have to convince me you were actually in a poly-amorous relationship, cohabiting happily with more than 1 partner...otherwise I'd class it as monogamy but with the freedom to explore "I'm confused, and this is a genuine question although most probably a highly pedantic one. What's these difference in polygamy and polymory...or are they the same thingn? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting link here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy The map on the right kinda turns the 'free world' on it's head. I didn't actually realise polygamy was illegal in so many countries. What does the state care whether a man has two or more wives or whether a wife has two or more husbands? Surely it's none of the state's business? So the penny drops that obviously the state benefits in some way by it's people either being in monogamous relationships or just plain lonely. If that's true then it's no wonder that we, as spoon fed citizens, just happen to hold the view that we prefer monogamy. Wow there's some serious deprogramming we need to do here to be free. Very interesting to see a facet of the western world which is still deeply prejudiced." As far as the state goes: A, the views of the state arevoften set in a time when religion held more sway than it did. Therefore, marriage between just two people became the norm. Plus, the state then took over marriages as a legal contract between two people which often resulted in tax relief. Married couples often pay less in tax than two single people, and those with dependents pay even less. Having multiple marriages causes potential minefields in this area so it's simpler for the state to carry on as it always had. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" As for Monogamy...Surely it's either that or Polygamy. As the 'amy' bit seems to refer to love (amorous I presume)..." There ya go
-gamy
— n combining form
denoting marriage or sexual union: bigamy
[from Greek -gamia, from gamos marriage] | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I simply can't share the love of my life with another man. Someone wd say that its hypocritical to be on a swinging website and not adobting the swinging ideology or life style. I think it all comes to a personal choice and what you're comfortable with. I am swinging as long as I am single i.e. if a married man is comfortable sharing his wife or gf with me "sexually" we are all in the same wave but that doesn't mean that I'll need to have to do the same if I had a life partner. Regarding the OP's question, having sex with more than one person at the same phase of your sexual life/periode is polygamy wether you're in love with just one person or more or not in love at all. In my opinion. " You will probably find it all much easier to accept once you let go of the idea that men are sharing women. Women are actually enjoying sex consensually and without coercion in many cases (not all) and certainly NOT being shared about by the men in their lives. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's always..."I don't think I could share my partner with someone else"..."I I I I"...never a thought about the partner. Once you begin to notice where that voice is coming from...that it's your own selfish jealously controlling side speaking...then any nobility the sentiment may have carried dissolves. It's basically a twist on the prisoners dilemma...two people each hoping for personal happiness...but not wanting it for their partner so each making detrimental choices for the other out of mock 'love' in order to ensure they are both mutually unhappy and imprisoned. Whilst it may seem noble to prevent your partner from fucking another person where does it stop...should they not kiss another person...should they not flirt with other people...should they not let another person touch them...should they not show themselves to another person??? It really is a quagmire of control and manipulation...all based upon the fact that you can't overcome your own jealousy...not really very spiritual or noble at all. So yes...I can understand how difficult it might be to imagine letting your partner get fucked by someone else...but what you do is just start on the smaller stuff...see whether you'll let her watch someone else...or show herself to someone else...and go from there. That's why the whole singles side of FAB, with it's endless drive towards shagging, isn't really very complimentary to the needs of a couple sensitively trying to explore the waters of swinging...where really the penetrative sex part is best left until a much later stage...when you've got your head around the idea of letting your partner have fun and dealt with your own jealousy issues. " Some people are swingers. Some people are not. One group of people is not better than the other. If someone does not want to share their partner, they don't have to.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some people are swingers. Some people are not. One group of people is not better than the other. If someone does not want to share their partner, they don't have to. "Hey Scarlet I'm totally cool with that as long as you rephrase it as... "If someone wants to control their partner they can." In which case you're absolutely right...it is a free world who am I to tell anyone what they can and cannot do | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some people are swingers. Some people are not. One group of people is not better than the other. If someone does not want to share their partner, they don't have to.
Hey Scarlet I'm totally cool with that as long as you rephrase it as...
"If someone wants to control their partner they can."
In which case you're absolutely right...it is a free world who am I to tell anyone what they can and cannot do "No it doesn't need rephrasing. It's not about control at all. If someone doesn't want to share their partner, that's up to them. If their partner feels controlled they shouldn't be in the relationship. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some people are swingers. Some people are not. One group of people is not better than the other. If someone does not want to share their partner, they don't have to.
Hey Scarlet I'm totally cool with that as long as you rephrase it as...
"If someone wants to control their partner they can."
In which case you're absolutely right...it is a free world who am I to tell anyone what they can
and cannot do "No I disagree, if people agree to just have sex with each other and are happy with that there is no element of control. There is more than one right way to have a successful relationship and more than one way if being controlling. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 x x X | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The phrase "If someone does not want to share their partner" infers that they're in a situation where their partner wants to be shared. If their partner doesn't want to be shared surely it's a non-issue and he/she can speak on their own behalf without you having to step in or have an opinion on it. The only time you'd need to step in would be if your partner wanted to be "shared"...in which case your stance would be "no I don't want to share you". This is why I see it as a controlling stance to take. Am I also to take it that you guys feel that I'm "sharing" my wife if I let her play with someone else? If so you've got a pretty superficial idea of our relationship. My life with my wife is deeeeeep, letting her have a bit of erotic fun with a stranger isn't "sharing" her in the slightest. Now if she see's the same guy over and over again and they fall in love and he wants to move in with us...well yes that would be sharing my wife...that I'd have a problem with, especially as I'm straight. If, however, my wife fell in love with a woman...and I fell in love with the same woman...and that woman fell in love with both of us...well that's fine...a bit quirky perhaps...but heck life is supposed to be an adventure so why not "but why do you talk about "letting" your wife have sex with other men? It's her choice isn't it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"but why do you talk about "letting" your wife have sex with other men? It's her choice isn't it? " To be honest we're not ready for full swap yet anyway lol But we decided that together and my view on the issue is that we should work it out together and always be honest and keep in close communication at all stages...rather than me have some preconceived blanket philosophy on the subject and dictate what she can and cannot do without talking with her about it. We are in a relationship so...no...I don't expect her just to float off and have sex with other guys without telling me...and in return I know she'd expect the same from me. In that sense you're right if you are being ironic...that isn't her choice alone to make. A lot of the people who've said they wouldn't want to share have been singles...this infers that they've made their mind up before they've even met their partner...let alone talked to him/her...lol 
Maybe I've been exaggerating to make a point...but seeing as not 'sharing' is the norm and we are on a swingers site I thought I'd argue in favor of why I feel it's nobler to 'share'
Think of it like two birds that fly freely together out of their love for each other...compared to two birds that have locked each other in the same cage so they can own each other and feel a sense of security that they'll always be there. One is beautiful noble and spiritual...the other is just plain wrong | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"but why do you talk about "letting" your wife have sex with other men? It's her choice isn't it? To be honest we're not ready for full swap yet anyway lol But we decided that together and my view on the issue is that we should work it out together and always be honest and keep in close communication at all stages...rather than me have some preconceived blanket philosophy on the subject and dictate what she can and cannot do without talking with her about it. We are in a relationship so...no...I don't expect her just to float off and have sex with other guys without telling me...and in return I know she'd expect the same from me. In that sense you're right if you are being ironic...that isn't her choice alone to make. A lot of the people who've said they wouldn't want to share have been singles...this infers that they've made their mind up before they've even met their partner...let alone talked to him/her...lol
Maybe I've been exaggerating to make a point...but seeing as not 'sharing' is the norm and we are on a swingers site I thought I'd argue in favor of why I feel it's nobler to 'share'
Think of it like two birds that fly freely together out of their love for each other...compared to two birds that have locked each other in the same cage so they can own each other and feel a sense of security that they'll always be there. One is beautiful noble and spiritual...the other is just plain wrong "If a couple both want to be monogomous that is NOT wrong. Some people apparently think they can control how strangers live their lives. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"but why do you talk about "letting" your wife have sex with other men? It's her choice isn't it? To be honest we're not ready for full swap yet anyway lol But we decided that together and my view on the issue is that we should work it out together and always be honest and keep in close communication at all stages...rather than me have some preconceived blanket philosophy on the subject and dictate what she can and cannot do without talking with her about it. We are in a relationship so...no...I don't expect her just to float off and have sex with other guys without telling me...and in return I know she'd expect the same from me. In that sense you're right if you are being ironic...that isn't her choice alone to make. A lot of the people who've said they wouldn't want to share have been singles...this infers that they've made their mind up before they've even met their partner...let alone talked to him/her...lol
Maybe I've been exaggerating to make a point...but seeing as not 'sharing' is the norm and we are on a swingers site I thought I'd argue in favor of why I feel it's nobler to 'share'
Think of it like two birds that fly freely together out of their love for each other...compared to two birds that have locked each other in the same cage so they can own each other and feel a sense of security that they'll always be there. One is beautiful noble and spiritual...the other is just plain wrong "your decription of any other relationship as just plain wrong is patronising and incorrect. I also think that your assumption that I am unable to understand the dynamic of the type of relationship you are describing is patronising and incorrect. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"your decription of any other relationship as just plain wrong is patronising and incorrect. I also think that your assumption that I am unable to understand the dynamic of the type of relationship you are describing is patronising and incorrect." Lol I'm on a hiding to nothing there then  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Im single and neutral and never been in a totally faithful relationship but i believe 1man 1woman can be faithful and happy for life.I've just not found her yet.and im not really lookin and it might never happen but i hope it does" yes they can and if that is what you want out of a relationship there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Scarlet you misread me...if two birds flying free each wish to fly solely with the other then that is wonderfully noble and spiritual. If, before the birds have even taken off...or before they've even met...one of them says they would never let the other bird fly with any other bird...that's a bit crappy really...isn't it? Flying only with each other is a wonderfully romantic thing...and it's what my wife and I have been doing for 20 years now. It's the question of what happens when you get to that cross roads and one of you brings up the idea that you'd like to swing. We've hit that cross roads and we're navigating it by talking to each other and compromising. Others mess it all up by saying no, being controlling, and then being surprised when their partner has an affair behind their back." Saying no I don't want you to fuck other people isn't controlling. Letting someone isn't spiritual,it's giving in in case they accuse you of being controlling. If I had someone's heart and he had mine I would not give him permission to go fuck someone else nor would I ask him if he wouldn't mind at all if I did. But I'm not spiritual | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i believe 1man 1woman can be faithful and happy for life." My wife and I are totally faithful to each other...and we will continue to be faithful to each other even if we end up fucking other people | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"your decription of any other relationship as just plain wrong is patronising and incorrect. I also think that your assumption that I am unable to understand the dynamic of the type of relationship you are describing is patronising and incorrect. Lol I'm on a hiding to nothing there then "I don't understand your remark. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I was gonna say Nicecouple...awww not even a smiley...  it's just a discussion "It is indeed but you are assuming a lot about me and our relationship and frankly describing things to me in terms of birds flying freely insulted my intelligence and our relationship | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lol you've gotta love it that I'm the lonely voice arguing for swinging on a swinging site "you aren't! You have misunderstood the relationship of a lot of people on here and what they're trying to say | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lol you've gotta love it that I'm the lonely voice arguing for swinging on a swinging site "I'm not against couples having sex with others. I just can't see me doing it with a husband. I could easily do it with someone I'm not in love with and I don't put down single people who don't want to do it. Or the couples who only meet single bi women for the wife. Each to their own and all that. No one has to justify why they do anything | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Saying no I don't want you to fuck other people isn't controlling. Letting someone isn't spiritual,it's giving in in case they accuse you of being controlling. If I had someone's heart and he had mine I would not give him permission to go fuck someone else nor would I ask him if he wouldn't mind at all if I did. But I'm not spiritual " You guys are still fixated on the sex bit...there are many swingers who only go as far as soft swinging or no swap swinging...this can mean as little as having sex in the same room as another couple having sex. Now lets get all steamy eyed and romantic about insisting that our partner does not do that shall we? Dearest love of my life...I refuse to allow you to have sex with me in the same room as others having sex...and in return I'll do the same as I hold your heart in my hand. Hmmm sounds a bit over the top to me...what's wrong with having sex in the same room as another couple having sex? Nothing...no infidelity...nothing. This universe is transcendentally beautiful...and to us humans that beauty includes the opposite sex. Sure if you've got a low sex drive and you genuinely don't look at other people in a flirtatious way then the issue of enjoying this aspect of the universe together may never need to come up. But if your partner is curious about being with others whilst they're being sexual, in seeing that part of the beauty of the universe, then you need to work it out between yourselves...not just act as a barrier. Lol I love a good argument...don't get too upset guys...just thrashing it out...each to their own and all that...I'm just putting my views forward and as my views are the 'david' to the 'goliath' of monogamy...even on this swinging site...I'm just kicking up some dust no harm intended...I'm sure everyone knows the main focus in life should be in finding that one true love out there to share their lives with...nothing I've written here will dissuade them from that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lol you've gotta love it that I'm the lonely voice arguing for swinging on a swinging site
you aren't! You have misunderstood the relationship of a lot of people on here and what they're trying to say "I'm just going on what has been said...there's been a lot of talk about not wanting to share partners...I've suggested such a stance is controlling especially if you've made it without consulting your partner. What am I missing Nicecouple? btw the little birdy thing wasn't an attempt to be patronising...it was a poetic analogy I was thinking about earlier today that I thought I'd slip in there. You guys are a swinging couple so, of course, you know exactly what I'm talking about...so what am I getting wrong? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lol you've gotta love it that I'm the lonely voice arguing for swinging on a swinging site
you aren't! You have misunderstood the relationship of a lot of people on here and what they're trying to say
I'm just going on what has been said...there's been a lot of talk about not wanting to share partners...I've suggested such a stance is controlling especially if you've made it without consulting your partner. What am I missing Nicecouple?
btw the little birdy thing wasn't an attempt to be patronising...it was a poetic analogy I was thinking about earlier today that I thought I'd slip in there. You guys are a swinging couple so, of course, you know exactly what I'm talking about...so what am I getting wrong?"I don't think you're getting anything wrong as far as describing your own relationship is concerned and if you feel that you aren't being patronising that's great.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mpassion , as admirable as it is to try and put your points across in such a new age , spiritual way , there is one major obstacle which you have yet to overcome . That being the fact that you are just beginning your journey , and the other posters are some way sown the road you may or may not take" Bingo hit the nail on the head there. I completely agree...genuinely...I know exactly what you're saying...which is why I'm likely to back off from the forums at some point...because it's all theory for me...not practice...and I realise that's a huge thing. Having said that...however...most of the people here were singles talking theoretically about how they wouldn't share a partner if they had one...so I figured that was fair game. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Saying no I don't want you to fuck other people isn't controlling. Letting someone isn't spiritual,it's giving in in case they accuse you of being controlling. If I had someone's heart and he had mine I would not give him permission to go fuck someone else nor would I ask him if he wouldn't mind at all if I did. But I'm not spiritual You guys are still fixated on the sex bit...there are many swingers who only go as far as soft swinging or no swap swinging...this can mean as little as having sex in the same room as another couple having sex. Now lets get all steamy eyed and romantic about insisting that our partner does not do that shall we? Dearest love of my life...I refuse to allow you to have sex with me in the same room as others having sex...and in return I'll do the same as I hold your heart in my hand. Hmmm sounds a bit over the top to me...what's wrong with having sex in the same room as another couple having sex? Nothing...no infidelity...nothing. This universe is transcendentally beautiful...and to us humans that beauty includes the opposite sex. Sure if you've got a low sex drive and you genuinely don't look at other people in a flirtatious way then the issue of enjoying this aspect of the universe together may never need to come up. But if your partner is curious about being with others whilst they're being sexual, in seeing that part of the beauty of the universe, then you need to work it out between yourselves...not just act as a barrier. Lol I love a good argument...don't get too upset guys...just thrashing it out...each to their own and all that...I'm just putting my views forward and as my views are the 'david' to the 'goliath' of monogamy...even on this swinging site...I'm just kicking up some dust no harm intended...I'm sure everyone knows the main focus in life should be in finding that one true love out there to share their lives with...nothing I've written here will dissuade them from that."firstly,no one is arguing. Secondly,swinging is about sex. You seem to be fixated on the 1960s ethos of free love,having communal sex. If you want to be spiritual about sex that's great,it's how you want it. Enjoy it while you feel that way. But remember, there may come a time when your partner will ask something of you that you don't want to do | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mpassion , as admirable as it is to try and put your points across in such a new age , spiritual way , there is one major obstacle which you have yet to overcome . That being the fact that you are just beginning your journey , and the other posters are some way sown the road you may or may not take Bingo hit the nail on the head there. I completely agree...genuinely...I know exactly what you're saying...which is why I'm likely to back off from the forums at some point...because it's all theory for me...not practice...and I realise that's a huge thing. Having said that...however...most of the people here were singles talking theoretically about how they wouldn't share a partner if they had one...so I figured that was fair game. "some singles have been married | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mpassion , as admirable as it is to try and put your points across in such a new age , spiritual way , there is one major obstacle which you have yet to overcome . That being the fact that you are just beginning your journey , and the other posters are some way sown the road you may or may not take Bingo hit the nail on the head there. I completely agree...genuinely...I know exactly what you're saying...which is why I'm likely to back off from the forums at some point...because it's all theory for me...not practice...and I realise that's a huge thing. Having said that...however...most of the people here were singles talking theoretically about how they wouldn't share a partner if they had one...so I figured that was fair game. "It's all fair game on an open forum , and you have raised some thought provoking points . Albeit as banana cake says , some are very hippy like free love ones ! And there is nothing wrong with that , but like any theory , the practise may be somewhat different , so be prepared to reserve judgement until then ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hmm starting to think you guys have misread my posts as sanctimonious when I was just trying to argue against conventional arguments for closed and controlled monogamy...and part of that means arguing why it is not 'dirty' and 'unspiritual' to allow that monogamous relationship to open up and become whatever it wants to become. I really didn't intend to get all holier than thou...so sorry if that's how it read "writing in this manner comes across as patronising to me. Now lets get all steamy eyed and romantic about insisting that our partner does not do that shall we? Dearest love of my life...I refuse to allow you to have sex with me in the same room as others having sex... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Hmm starting to think you guys have misread my posts as sanctimonious when I was just trying to argue against conventional arguments for closed and controlled monogamy...and part of that means arguing why it is not 'dirty' and 'unspiritual' to allow that monogamous relationship to open up and become whatever it wants to become. I really didn't intend to get all holier than thou...so sorry if that's how it read "Here's the rub , if one was to engage in this extension of allowing it to become whatever it wants to become . Do you remember the early weeks of your relationship when it began ? You wanted to be together 24/7 , do everything together , and you couldn't see or think of anything else . How do you think you will feel when this reoccurs for each if you with someone else ? Especially if one of you finds the new love of their life and the other doesn't ? So you remain at home while your partner spends every minute of their spare time with this new and exciting person , with your blessing . Not necessarily having wild and passionate sex , no , much more than that . Walking in the park , hand in hand , making plans for the future , wining and dining , laughing and without a care in the world ...... With your blessing . Be careful what you wish for ...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
As for the whole free love thing...we do use that phrase on our profile...but might not stick to it...and I haven't mentioned it here. But we are looking for more meaningful and more erotic encounters than just a bunch of shagging...so we felt we needed to try and differentiate slightly what it is we're looking for. We may never 'allow' each other to have penetrative sex with other people...but that's a discussion we're having with each other...not something I'm imposing on her.
What I'd like others reading this to realise, particularly singles who don't like the idea of swinging, is that opening up a monogamous relationship is not a black and white issue. It's not a case of either you have sex with other people or you can't even watch porn you're so darn into each other. There's a lot of shades of grey in between. Some of those shades of grey involve having sex in the same room as others having sex...being touched by others whilst having sex...and all sorts of lovely sexy play in and around that whole thing. Indeed we we're only talking today about how kinky it would be to meet up for a romantic meal out with another couple and sit together as if we we're actually with each other's partner, giving them kisses, touches, and attention. All the talk about 'sharing' your partner...about sex sex sex...it misses the point that a large part of swinging is merely about moving away from the highly confined sense of conventional monogamy...which the Christian culture we live in tells us is the most spiritual way of living because the body is sin...and lets in more of a playful way of enjoying the world together.... at least that's the theory imo lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and still be a "swinger" in the broadest sense of the word? I mean is it possible to swing with different partners and yet still be monogamous? "In my eyes, monogamy is in the heart, head and emotions. Therefore having casual sex with others to enhance your sex life is just that .... living breathing toys who enter into a mutually satisfying game of sex with others given that it is in agreeance with all concerned. I could love my partner heart and soul but if he wanted a 4some I'd be happy to indulge. Sex in that situation is not about love, it is about lust and excitement, adventure and the unknown ........ all with your partners blessing. But then again if it wasn't for my partner then I'd not indulge either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's always..."I don't think I could share my partner with someone else"..."I I I I"...never a thought about the partner. Once you begin to notice where that voice is coming from...that it's your own selfish jealously controlling side speaking...then any nobility the sentiment may have carried dissolves. It's basically a twist on the prisoners dilemma...two people each hoping for personal happiness...but not wanting it for their partner so each making detrimental choices for the other out of mock 'love' in order to ensure they are both mutually unhappy and imprisoned. Whilst it may seem noble to prevent your partner from fucking another person where does it stop...should they not kiss another person...should they not flirt with other people...should they not let another person touch them...should they not show themselves to another person??? " Yup, you got it. When I am in a full-on monogamous relationship I have no desire to do any of those things. I would not want any man that would want to share me either - simples. You don't appear to be considering this persepective. Different people want different things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Be careful what you wish for ...... "Sorry...just to be absolutely clear...we're not looking for a polyamorous relationship...so no...we're not wishing for this at all. Indeed the whole issue of falling in love with someone else is one of the most sensitive and dangerous territories of swinging...which is why, again, we're more interested in low level erotic encounters more than full swapping at the mo. I think, perhaps, the 'free love' thing and the fact that I've argued against polygamy being illegal are leading you lot to think I'm an ideologue bent on relationship suicide lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lol Banana you got me there...ok I got a bit carried away there
As for the whole free love thing...we do use that phrase on our profile...but might not stick to it...and I haven't mentioned it here. But we are looking for more meaningful and more erotic encounters than just a bunch of shagging...so we felt we needed to try and differentiate slightly what it is we're looking for. We may never 'allow' each other to have penetrative sex with other people...but that's a discussion we're having with each other...not something I'm imposing on her.
What I'd like others reading this to realise, particularly singles who don't like the idea of swinging, is that opening up a monogamous relationship is not a black and white issue. It's not a case of either you have sex with other people or you can't even watch porn you're so darn into each other. There's a lot of shades of grey in between. Some of those shades of grey involve having sex in the same room as others having sex...being touched by others whilst having sex...and all sorts of lovely sexy play in and around that whole thing. Indeed we we're only talking today about how kinky it would be to meet up for a romantic meal out with another couple and sit together as if we we're actually with each other's partner, giving them kisses, touches, and attention. All the talk about 'sharing' your partner...about sex sex sex...it misses the point that a large part of swinging is merely about moving away from the highly confined sense of conventional monogamy...which the Christian culture we live in tells us is the most spiritual way of living because the body is sin...and lets in more of a playful way of enjoying the world together.... at least that's the theory imo lol "I'm an atheist. I live by my rules not a Church's or anyone else. I'm a child of the 60s,when free love was born with the introduction of the pill. No worries about getting someone pregnant. Swinging was also borne from that,no getting someone elses missus pregnant. Add to that purple hearts,LSD and and inhibitions are thrown to the wind along with your Kaftans and flower power knickers (I had those). I like some of your fantasies,they sound erotic;I'm more into eroticism than just sex sex sex. I hope you find another couple with the same fantasies as you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yup, you got it. When I am in a full-on monogamous relationship I have no desire to do any of those things. I would not want any man that would want to share me either - simples. You don't appear to be considering this persepective. Different people want different things. "And a couple who wants those things is no less spiritual, no less in love, no less faithful to each other, and no less wonderful and amazing people than those who don't. Your statement about not wanting a man who would be happy to share you infers you have a low opinion of such people....that they are somehow lesser, dirtier, unsavory, unspiritual types. My wife and I are soul mates. We've been profoundly in love for 20 years and now have a beautiful child together. I have written her music and romantic poetry and I will continue to let her know what an extra special person she is. We've been through thick and thin for each other. Together we've grown to realise that we live in a very conservative society with messed up Christian views about the body being sin...so we're working together to free ourselves of this bad programming so that we can love life more deeply. I would hope you find a partner who is as open to your personal growth. That's not something to look down your nose at...that's amazing!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yup, you got it. When I am in a full-on monogamous relationship I have no desire to do any of those things. I would not want any man that would want to share me either - simples. You don't appear to be considering this persepective. Different people want different things.
And a couple who wants those things is no less spiritual, no less in love, no less faithful to each other, and no less wonderful and amazing people than those who don't. Your statement about not wanting a man who would be happy to share you infers you have a low opinion of such people....that they are somehow lesser, dirtier, unsavory, unspiritual types.
My wife and I are soul mates. We've been profoundly in love for 20 years and now have a beautiful child together. I have written her music and romantic poetry and I will continue to let her know what an extra special person she is. We've been through thick and thin for each other. Together we've grown to realise that we live in a very conservative society with messed up Christian views about the body being sin...so we're working together to free ourselves of this bad programming so that we can love life more deeply. I would hope you find a partner who is as open to your personal growth. That's not something to look down your nose at...that's amazing!! "Well said mpassion, that statement you made reads as a mature loving sharing couple secure in their relationship and desirous of pleasing themselves and each other without guilt or constraints put upon them by the church or others. We should all be so lucky to have such a partnership. Pleasure yourselves and others .... FAB in my opinion. xx  xx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm an atheist. I live by my rules not a Church's or anyone else. I'm a child of the 60s,when free love was born with the introduction of the pill. No worries about getting someone pregnant. Swinging was also borne from that,no getting someone elses missus pregnant. Add to that purple hearts,LSD and and inhibitions are thrown to the wind along with your Kaftans and flower power knickers (I had those). I like some of your fantasies,they sound erotic;I'm more into eroticism than just sex sex sex. I hope you find another couple with the same fantasies as you " Wow Banana...you're a hippy like us Of course we missed the sixties...but we still caught the bug...especially after living in San Francisco for a few years
Great to find someone else who's open to paddling in erotic waters rather than in a rush to jump into the deep end | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yup, you got it. When I am in a full-on monogamous relationship I have no desire to do any of those things. I would not want any man that would want to share me either - simples. You don't appear to be considering this persepective. Different people want different things.
Your statement about not wanting a man who would be happy to share you infers you have a low opinion of such people....that they are somehow lesser, dirtier, unsavory, unspiritual types.
"No, your assumption is incorrect, I never implied anything of the sort, such a man would simply be wholely unsuitable for me! I know what works for me and I would want someone who feels the same for a life partner. My statement was in reaction to your perspective that someone who is not free to play is being controlled. Not so, many people choose it of their own free will through strength and wholeness. I love the buzz of total exclusivity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, your assumption is incorrect, I never implied anything of the sort, such a man would simply be wholely unsuitable for me! I know what works for me and I would want someone who feels the same for a life partner." I apologise Frisky. Why are you on Fab looking for men then? Surely you're fishing in the wrong pool? Also...just to make myself clear again...two people who don't want to share are not controlling each other if that position is genuine and not based upon fear, insecurity, or ideology. I suspect, based upon the large number of marriages that fail or of infidelities that take place, that many more people are sexually curious about the world around them than would let on in polite company. In that instance one or perhaps even both partners would be trying to hide an aspect of themselves, perhaps in shame, from each other, keeping up a facade and perhaps feeling controlled by the other...when in fact it would be better to talk about it together maturely and to negotiate about what can be done to allow such exploration to take place under the loving roof of monogamy. That, for me, is the vital role swinging has to play. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, your assumption is incorrect, I never implied anything of the sort, such a man would simply be wholely unsuitable for me! I know what works for me and I would want someone who feels the same for a life partner. I apologise Frisky. Why are you on Fab looking for men then? Surely you're fishing in the wrong pool? Also...just to make myself clear again...two people who don't want to share are not controlling each other if that position is genuine and not based upon fear, insecurity, or ideology. I suspect, based upon the large number of marriages that fail or of infidelities that take place, that many more people are sexually curious about the world around them than would let on in polite company. In that instance one or perhaps even both partners would be trying to hide an aspect of themselves, perhaps in shame, from each other, keeping up a facade and perhaps feeling controlled by the other...when in fact it would be better to talk about it together maturely and to negotiate about what can be done to allow such exploration to take place under the loving roof of monogamy. That, for me, is the vital role swinging has to play." Would you be happy for your wife to have many partners? If she wanted to express herself freely every week with a different man would you be happy for her? Would there be such a thing as being out of control? I can imagine in some relationships that would have collapsed without consent to stray,aka cheating,some partners would be spreading the love to quite a few people on a regular basis. If this site is anything to go by the women will be having much more sex than the men | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
But, in theory, I'd imagine the bigger problem would be either of us becoming infatuated with someone (men fall in love too you know). I'd imagine there's a certain safety in playing around with lots of different people. But I also think that there could be something deeply rewarding for Mrs P, if she becomes more then merely Bi-curious, in having a sisterhood...an extended family...and perhaps that's where our views verge on polyamorous...although we'd want to go very very slowly if we we're gonna go down that route as we've already had experiences of women living with us which have been a bit hairy | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I made a commitment to Mrs P many moons ago that I'd do my best to try and make sure her life was as wonderful as possible. If I sought to control her or limit what she could experience our relationship wouldn't be based on love. Contrary to this, present society seems to expect people to lose their sexual interest, and hence lust for life, when they enter into marriage. They are supposed to limit and control each other, get a mortgage, get into debt, and become slaves to the state's idea of what kind of life they should be living. This is not a relationship based on love. What is unloving about letting my wife have sex with another man if she's having the time of her life? And what's loving about locking her away and telling her what she can and cannot do? On top of that you have to ask the question about what is actually unfaithful and what is not. I once sat near an Arab couple on a London bus and heard him giving her an extreme telling off for smiling so much. He said it made her look like a whore. If my wife shows affection to a man how would I be any different if I tried to block her and tell her off? If she has fantasies she wants to explore...what right have I to condemn her to going to her grave without ever having even tasted them? Too many people on this site jump to the conclusion that this is all about sex...but why shouldn't a couple be able to experience a vast range of erotic experiences with others without complicating things and having sex? Sure there is a tendency towards falling in love...but what's wrong with that if you act maturely about it...what's wrong with falling in love with life?
I'm not saying free love is an easy path to take...but it is the most loving and most spiritual imo " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Mpassion , as admirable as it is to try and put your points across in such a new age , spiritual way , there is one major obstacle which you have yet to overcome . That being the fact that you are just beginning your journey , and the other posters are some way sown the road you may or may not take . Therefore they speak from their experiences , which you have yet to have . There us an almost sanctimonious slant to some of your points . More so because you don't speak from having had the experience of actually doing that which you talk of in such an educated way . You say you would be happy for your wife to experience love with another man , but if they wanted to move in it wouldn't be acceptable as you are straight , yet if she found it with a woman and you loved her too that would be fine . How exactly is this allowing her , as a free bird , to do as she wishes ? Perhaps you need to indulge a bit more in your fantasies before judging others who have found what works for them ? "
It is indeed odd that he thinks monogomy is controlling yet said he wouldn't allow his wife to have an MMF relationship.... but MFF would be ok. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing is that we all do this in the way that suits us, the way that we find acceptable and that we can live with. It would be dangerous and foolhardy for anyone to believe that their way was morally, ideologically or emotionally superior to anyone elses. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No, your assumption is incorrect, I never implied anything of the sort, such a man would simply be wholely unsuitable for me! I know what works for me and I would want someone who feels the same for a life partner. I apologise Frisky. Why are you on Fab looking for men then? Surely you're fishing in the wrong pool? Also...just to make myself clear again...two people who don't want to share are not controlling each other if that position is genuine and not based upon fear, insecurity, or ideology. I suspect, based upon the large number of marriages that fail or of infidelities that take place, that many more people are sexually curious about the world around them than would let on in polite company." Or the marriage has simply failed and thats why the infidelity occurred. Why am I here? Because I have no intention of going without sex while waiting for MrDarcy MkII to come along! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
Firstly..Scarlet...I'm currently in a 20 year old monogamous relationship so of course I don't think monogamy is controlling...and as for the MMF vs MFF...I'm guessing you wouldn't be open to either on a long term basis so at least give me credit for being more open minded than you lol. The reason why an MMF relationship would be doomed on a long term basis is because I'm straight...and therefore there could be no actual love triangle...whereas in an MFF relationship there is the possibility that we may all love each other equally...so that's why that would work while the other one wouldn't.
...and Frisky Don't worry...I guessed you were on here for a good time...but isn't there a strong risk that you might find a suitable man out of the entirely unsuitable candidates you're shagging around with on here...or do you truly loathe the men on Fab that much that you can guarantee you won't fall for any of them? If there's a chance that you might end up falling for a man who would be happy sharing you don't you think you should either fish elsewhere or rethink your convictions on this issue?
Happy sunny day See y'all around | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" ...and Frisky Don't worry...I guessed you were on here for a good time...but isn't there a strong risk that you might find a suitable man out of the entirely unsuitable candidates you're shagging around with on here...or do you truly loathe the men on Fab that much that you can guarantee you won't fall for any of them? If there's a chance that you might end up falling for a man who would be happy sharing you don't you think you should either fish elsewhere or rethink your convictions on this issue?
"No my perspective will not change because it is not a conviction but an understanding of my own psychology. Yes it's a dangerous place to be but the guys I see tend to be of a similar mind quite often. Besides, I have fished the other pools and not been impressed! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I did just want to wrap this thread up by clearing something up for the female readers.
The idea that there is a man out there who won't look at other women sexually once they fall in love with you is an unrealistic fantasy. The only men who are likely to fulfill this expectation are men with low sex drives who really aren't all that sexual or interested in sex. Any other man WILL look at other women sexually...no matter how much in love with you they are. They may disguise it well, they may keep it behind sunglasses, they may wear a large brimmed hat, they may pretend to cough, or they may be super cunning and just use their peripheral vision, they may even come onto this thread and protest their innocence in an attempt to convince you otherwise. But when that sexy babe goes sauntering past....they WILL look. And when they look what will they be thinking? Whether it's conscious or subconscious...they'll be thinking..."Oooo I'd love to have some fun with that".
Any woman who doesn't believe this, who believes they'll be able to find the one sexy male who won't look at other women in this way, is going to run into problems at some point. We're just not wired that way. Either we have a low sex drive and we don't look at any women that way...yourself included...or we're dogs on heat who either fess up to it or hide it well. And it gets worse the older we get.
Once you get over the disappointment and log this next to Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny, I hope you realise that it's not men's fault...you certainly shouldn't think any lesser of your man when you eventually discover he does look at other women sexually...it's just that you were unrealistic and believed in something that never had a shred of truth about it.
And if you don't believe me just ask yourself what percentage of men do you think look at porn? Now imagine that this same hot honey passes those men in the street...and you're seriously expecting them not to look?!?!?!
Sending out peace vibes now...not looking to stir up any more hornets nests...just thought I'd try and clear that up because it seems like some women have unrealistic expectations of the men they meet. Peace Have a great day | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Excellent post Blackspice
I did just want to wrap this thread up by clearing something up for the female readers.
The idea that there is a man out there who won't look at other women sexually once they fall in love with you is an unrealistic fantasy. The only men who are likely to fulfill this expectation are men with low sex drives who really aren't all that sexual or interested in sex. Any other man WILL look at other women sexually...no matter how much in love with you they are. They may disguise it well, they may keep it behind sunglasses, they may wear a large brimmed hat, they may pretend to cough, or they may be super cunning and just use their peripheral vision, they may even come onto this thread and protest their innocence in an attempt to convince you otherwise. But when that sexy babe goes sauntering past....they WILL look. And when they look what will they be thinking? Whether it's conscious or subconscious...they'll be thinking..."Oooo I'd love to have some fun with that".
Any woman who doesn't believe this, who believes they'll be able to find the one sexy male who won't look at other women in this way, is going to run into problems at some point. We're just not wired that way. Either we have a low sex drive and we don't look at any women that way...yourself included...or we're dogs on heat who either fess up to it or hide it well. And it gets worse the older we get.
Once you get over the disappointment and log this next to Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny, I hope you realise that it's not men's fault...you certainly shouldn't think any lesser of your man when you eventually discover he does look at other women sexually...it's just that you were unrealistic and believed in something that never had a shred of truth about it.
And if you don't believe me just ask yourself what percentage of men do you think look at porn? Now imagine that this same hot honey passes those men in the street...and you're seriously expecting them not to look?!?!?!
Sending out peace vibes now...not looking to stir up any more hornets nests...just thought I'd try and clear that up because it seems like some women have unrealistic expectations of the men they meet. Peace Have a great day"Bloomin 'eck mpassion could you be any more patronising? Possibly some female readers have that idea but most of us are pretty realistic and know full well that our men may eat at home but often gain their appetite looking at what's on the menu elsewhere. Honestly! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Excellent post Blackspice
I did just want to wrap this thread up by clearing something up for the female readers.
The idea that there is a man out there who won't look at other women sexually once they fall in love with you is an unrealistic fantasy. "Duh?? The idea that there are women out there who won't look at other men sexually once they have fallen in love with you is an unrealistic fantasy!! Of course we look, and appreciate, and imagine, and even fantasise. Yes, we can do all that without wanting or intending to actually go and do anything about it, and so can plenty of men I assure you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"monogamy[ muh-nog-uh-mee ] noun 1. marriage with only one person at a time. 2. the practice of having only one mate. 3. the practice of marrying only once during life. if you fuck someone other than your partner you have another mate therefore you are not monogamous lol. You can't have your cake and eat it " I have never claimed to be monogomous I am therefore having cake, cookies and gateaux and eating the lot | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Morning!! Firstly..Scarlet...I'm currently in a 20 year old monogamous relationship so of course I don't think monogamy is controlling...and as for the MMF vs MFF...I'm guessing you wouldn't be open to either on a long term basis so at least give me credit for being more open minded than you lol. The reason why an MMF relationship would be doomed on a long term basis is because I'm straight...and therefore there could be no actual love triangle...whereas in an MFF relationship there is the possibility that we may all love each other equally...so that's why that would work while the other one wouldn't.
...and Frisky Don't worry...I guessed you were on here for a good time...but isn't there a strong risk that you might find a suitable man out of the entirely unsuitable candidates you're shagging around with on here...or do you truly loathe the men on Fab that much that you can guarantee you won't fall for any of them? If there's a chance that you might end up falling for a man who would be happy sharing you don't you think you should either fish elsewhere or rethink your convictions on this issue?
Happy sunny day See y'all around "Lots of people are in mmf long term relationships where the woman lives and lives with two men who aren't bi/gay so ones sexuality has nothing to do with it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"oh and by the way this is a public forum teh thread will wrap up when its good and ready or it reaches 175 posts, not when you deem it right. " Chill out "Nice"couple it was just a turn of phrase as I figured the thread had run it's course...but obviously it hasn't | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"oh and by the way this is a public forum teh thread will wrap up when its good and ready or it reaches 175 posts, not when you deem it right.
Chill out "Nice"couple it was just a turn of phrase as I figured the thread had run it's course...but obviously it hasn't" blimey! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"monogamy[ muh-nog-uh-mee ] noun 1. marriage with only one person at a time. 2. the practice of having only one mate. 3. the practice of marrying only once during life. if you fuck someone other than your partner you have another mate therefore you are not monogamous lol. You can't have your cake and eat it " We are monogamous as we're not fucking other people. Indeed we can continue to have a whole range of erotic experiences with others whilst remaining deeply monogamous...having cake...and eating it...yum yum | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Morning!! Firstly..Scarlet...I'm currently in a 20 year old monogamous relationship so of course I don't think monogamy is controlling...and as for the MMF vs MFF...I'm guessing you wouldn't be open to either on a long term basis so at least give me credit for being more open minded than you lol. The reason why an MMF relationship would be doomed on a long term basis is because I'm straight...and therefore there could be no actual love triangle...whereas in an MFF relationship there is the possibility that we may all love each other equally...so that's why that would work while the other one wouldn't.
...and Frisky Don't worry...I guessed you were on here for a good time...but isn't there a strong risk that you might find a suitable man out of the entirely unsuitable candidates you're shagging around with on here...or do you truly loathe the men on Fab that much that you can guarantee you won't fall for any of them? If there's a chance that you might end up falling for a man who would be happy sharing you don't you think you should either fish elsewhere or rethink your convictions on this issue?
Happy sunny day See y'all around
Lots of people are in mmf long term relationships where the woman lives and lives with two men who aren't bi/gay so ones sexuality has nothing to do with it"That should be loves and lives | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I tend to think of those kind of relationships as somewhat doomed as there's an inequality in them...but good to know some of them work out ok. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've evolved. These simplistic doctrines based on sex leading to procreation have lost legitimacy with the development of effective contraception and equality across the sexes. We have been freed from the once practical need to control based on protecting ones bloodline and legacy. Possession, insecurity, jealousy, selfishness and control should not be the core reasons for imposing monogamy in it's 'biblical' sense on anybody. Monogamy shouldn't be seen as the only 'badge of proof' for the love a person has for their chosen partner. It should just be seen as a choice no more or less valid than the ability to love and trust your partner enough not to imprison certain aspects of their sex life. Owning is not necessarily loving. " When you meet someone and talk about marriage you both know you are giving up all others. It doesn't happen very often and marriage end because of cheating. Couples who agree to allow others into their relationship for sexual relief also split up. Some just can't keep emotions out of it. Even soft swap couples split up. Adding extra sex to a doomed partnership won't save it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've evolved. These simplistic doctrines based on sex leading to procreation have lost legitimacy with the development of effective contraception and equality across the sexes. We have been freed from the once practical need to control based on protecting ones bloodline and legacy. Possession, insecurity, jealousy, selfishness and control should not be the core reasons for imposing monogamy in it's 'biblical' sense on anybody. Monogamy shouldn't be seen as the only 'badge of proof' for the love a person has for their chosen partner. It should just be seen as a choice no more or less valid than the ability to love and trust your partner enough not to imprison certain aspects of their sex life. Owning is not necessarily loving. When you meet someone and talk about marriage you both know you are giving up all others. It doesn't happen very often and marriage end because of cheating. Couples who agree to allow others into their relationship for sexual relief also split up. Some just can't keep emotions out of it. Even soft swap couples split up. Adding extra sex to a doomed partnership won't save it " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"monogamy[ muh-nog-uh-mee ] noun 1. marriage with only one person at a time. 2. the practice of having only one mate. 3. the practice of marrying only once during life. if you fuck someone other than your partner you have another mate therefore you are not monogamous lol. You can't have your cake and eat it I have never claimed to be monogomous I am therefore having cake, cookies and gateaux and eating the lot "you obviously get the cream too lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Morning!! Firstly..Scarlet...I'm currently in a 20 year old monogamous relationship so of course I don't think monogamy is controlling...and as for the MMF vs MFF...I'm guessing you wouldn't be open to either on a long term basis so at least give me credit for being more open minded than you lol. "Your patronising guess as to how open minded I am is sadly incorrect 'lol'. You just carry on down your condescending inexperienced path. I won't confirm or deny what is in fact true about me and my experiences. You get no credit from me. (stupid grin smiley) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed by poster at 24/05/14 18:38:34]That is what I was wondering. I mean you could for example really love a person and still have sex with others without betraying that love? I am not talking about doing things behind partner's back here.. just to clarify beforehand!" I consider myself to be monogamous kinda... we love each other & we swing. We only do meets together, go to clubs together. We never do these things seperately. Whether we are both lucky enough to play at meets/clubs is another thing, but we go together & each hope the other has much fun. Julie x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"monogamy[ muh-nog-uh-mee ] noun 1. marriage with only one person at a time. 2. the practice of having only one mate. 3. the practice of marrying only once during life. if you fuck someone other than your partner you have another mate therefore you are not monogamous lol. You can't have your cake and eat it I have never claimed to be monogomous I am therefore having cake, cookies and gateaux and eating the lot
you obviously get the cream too lol "I do! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Havent read the whole thread, Far too long.Personally I refuse to get hung up on antiquated labels. As mankind evolves so too should our concept of relationships. " Why should they? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Monogamy wasn't a "badge of proof" for me. It was me only wanting him. To me it was natural,I only ever wanted him and still don't want anyone else " you and I have a different approach to long term relationships but I suspect we would both be of the opinion that we should all conduct them the way that suits us and no one else. Too many people thinking their way is the only way | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Havent read the whole thread, Far too long.Personally I refuse to get hung up on antiquated labels. As mankind evolves so too should our concept of relationships. Why should they? " See, there's that word "should" again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Monogamy wasn't a "badge of proof" for me. It was me only wanting him. To me it was natural,I only ever wanted him and still don't want anyone else you and I have a different approach to long term relationships but I suspect we would both be of the opinion that we should all conduct them the way that suits us and no one else. Too many people thinking their way is the only way " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Too many people thinking their way is the only way "I didn't catch anyone saying their way was the only way? I certainly don't think that if you were referring to me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok after all the 'stupid smiley grins' and the straight faced antagonism on this thread I took the time to read back through the whole thing. The vast majority of my posts have been arguments about ideas...and apart from rolling my eyes at how 'nice' nicecouple weren't being a couple of times...and apart from my assumption that scarlet wasn't into polygamy when she is (sorry about that Scarlet)...I feel that none of my posts have been personal in any way. I've really only been arguing about ideas and ways of seeing monogamy, faithfulness, etc. Some of you guys seem to think I'm being condescending or patronising when I talk about things which are obvious to you...but I don't think they're obvious to everyone and that's why I wrote them...not to be a patronising and condescending git like you're trying to paint me as. Over the course of the thread I have repeatedly tried to make light of the abuse I've been getting and make peace. Ok I get it that some of you disagree with me...and some of you have misread my remarks as condescending or patronising or sanctimonious perhaps. But those are misreadings. Many of your posts have been straight up nasty and personal...and that's not a misreading...I'm hearing you loud and clear...you genuinely dislike me...I get it. All I'm saying here is I think you'll find your nasty remarks are not really warranted when you look back through the thread. I think I've been pretty cool and kept to the point, keeping on talking about ideas rather than attacking other posters. It would've been nice if you guys had been able to do the same. Anyway...no big deal...just thought it was about time I stood up for myself. Now try and be nice people ...again ...you'll see in this post I haven't been personal about anyone...try and bear that in mind before you write your next ripping attack on my character "I disagree with some things you've said but I don't dislike you. I don't like people making assumptions ...you did again in this post and again you were wrong.... but that's fine. Haven't seen any attacks on your character. It's just banter, debate, discussion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Too many people thinking their way is the only way
I didn't catch anyone saying their way was the only way? I certainly don't think that if you were referring to me."I wasn't referring to you, if I were I would address you personally and directly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I was worried that all the posts calling me condescending and patronising we're personal attacks on my character. Good to know they weren't | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ok that's great I was worried that all the posts calling me condescending and patronising we're personal attacks on my character. Good to know they weren't "They were comments on what you'd written. We can't attack your character we don't know you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I haven't taken offence at you referring to me as "nice" couple on two occasions" I only said it once and that was because you weren't being very nice to me...not anything more than that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They were comments on what you'd written." How can something written be either condescending or patronising. Take the following... "Now everyone in order to walk we must place one foot in front of the other" It may be condescending and patronising if you say that to a bunch of adults but not if you say it to toddlers. The text itself is neither condescending nor patronising...it can't be without giving it a context. Plus both words talk about the aim of the person who wrote it...not the words themselves. Yes? or no? So they must be personal remarks no? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They were comments on what you'd written. How can something written be either condescending or patronising. Take the following... "Now everyone in order to walk we must place one foot in front of the other" It may be condescending and patronising if you say that to a bunch of adults but not if you say it to toddlers. The text itself is neither condescending nor patronising...it can't be without giving it a context. Plus both words talk about the aim of the person who wrote it...not the words themselves. Yes? or no? So they must be personal remarks no?" I'm not going to debate this any further with you because it's clear that you are intent on painting me as the nasty lady who is making personal attacks on you. I wish you well in your adventures, I hope you join in the other threads in the fora and both of you enjoy your time on fab. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They were comments on what you'd written. How can something written be either condescending or patronising. Take the following... "Now everyone in order to walk we must place one foot in front of the other" It may be condescending and patronising if you say that to a bunch of adults but not if you say it to toddlers. The text itself is neither condescending nor patronising...it can't be without giving it a context. Plus both words talk about the aim of the person who wrote it...not the words themselves. Yes? or no? So they must be personal remarks no?" "Clearing things up for the female readers".... suggesting a female poster is on here "shagging around"..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They were comments on what you'd written. How can something written be either condescending or patronising...... "Clearing things up for the female readers".... suggesting a female poster is on here "shagging around"..... "Yes I chose to ignore that rather misogynistic remark, haha! Obviously the written word can be patronising or condescending too, if that is the sentiment they convey. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've evolved. These simplistic doctrines based on sex leading to procreation have lost legitimacy with the development of effective contraception and equality across the sexes. We have been freed from the once practical need to control based on protecting ones bloodline and legacy. Possession, insecurity, jealousy, selfishness and control should not be the core reasons for imposing monogamy in it's 'biblical' sense on anybody. Monogamy shouldn't be seen as the only 'badge of proof' for the love a person has for their chosen partner. It should just be seen as a choice no more or less valid than the ability to love and trust your partner enough not to imprison certain aspects of their sex life. Owning is not necessarily loving. When you meet someone and talk about marriage you both know you are giving up all others. It doesn't happen very often and marriage end because of cheating. Couples who agree to allow others into their relationship for sexual relief also split up. Some just can't keep emotions out of it. Even soft swap couples split up. Adding extra sex to a doomed partnership won't save it " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I certainly never suggested that a female poster was on here 'shagging around'..." Yes, you did, it was the exact, rather insulting phrase you used to me 11 hrs ago. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I say monogamy is just part of religious doctrine.. I'd imagine it means we are supposed to have only ONE sexual partner in our life " I would agree with that. There have been times when we can't manage only one in an hour | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, you did, it was the exact, rather insulting phrase you used to me 11 hrs ago. " Ouch did I really say that...I'm so sorry  We are on a swinging NSA sex site and I just meant it as in the fact that you are having fun with different guys...which I assume you are...or at least I hope you are. No condemnation at all...after all why are we on here if not for the same thing. Sorry I shouldn't have used the phrase 'shagging' as that sounded derogatory when I don't feel that way about it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, you did, it was the exact, rather insulting phrase you used to me 11 hrs ago. Ouch did I really say that...I'm so sorry We are on a swinging NSA sex site and I just meant it as in the fact that you are having fun with different guys...which I assume you are...or at least I hope you are. No condemnation at all...after all why are we on here if not for the same thing. Sorry I shouldn't have used the phrase 'shagging' as that sounded derogatory when I don't feel that way about it "you could have said fanny plundering!..thats a nice term | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes, you did, it was the exact, rather insulting phrase you used to me 11 hrs ago. Ouch did I really say that...I'm so sorry We are on a swinging NSA sex site and I just meant it as in the fact that you are having fun with different guys...which I assume you are...or at least I hope you are. No condemnation at all...after all why are we on here if not for the same thing. Sorry I shouldn't have used the phrase 'shagging' as that sounded derogatory when I don't feel that way about it "Apology accepted, luckily it takes more than that to get my back up. But I do believe in the old adage 'Out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks' and I think considering the number of rather unfortunate remarks on this thread you might want to think about what you actually believe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've evolved. These simplistic doctrines based on sex leading to procreation have lost legitimacy with the development of effective contraception and equality across the sexes. We have been freed from the once practical need to control based on protecting ones bloodline and legacy. Possession, insecurity, jealousy, selfishness and control should not be the core reasons for imposing monogamy in it's 'biblical' sense on anybody. Monogamy shouldn't be seen as the only 'badge of proof' for the love a person has for their chosen partner. It should just be seen as a choice no more or less valid than the ability to love and trust your partner enough not to imprison certain aspects of their sex life. Owning is not necessarily loving. When you meet someone and talk about marriage you both know you are giving up all others. It doesn't happen very often and marriage end because of cheating. Couples who agree to allow others into their relationship for sexual relief also split up. Some just can't keep emotions out of it. Even soft swap couples split up. Adding extra sex to a doomed partnership won't save it "Cheating has nothing to do with this, it's a different debate. Marriages end for lots of reasons. Lots of monogamous marriages end in divorce, would that be a reason to not be monogamous? Lots of very successful marriages allow each partner to have sexual freedom within the marriage. Lets not forget this is a swinging site, you don't have to look far to find some of these couples, and be clear, lots of them are very happy! If you fall in love with a man who loves you too and wants to commit to you as his life partner, but also wants to enjoy purely sexual activities with other women. If you truly love that person, why would this be a problem? If your answer is based on your feelings and not his, what does that say about your love? I'm not saying there's a right or wrong, I just believe that every couple should choose for themselves what is going to work for them. Nobody should have monogamy in the biblical sense impossed on them. We've evolved. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
In terms of how I'm coming across...I think you're imagining that I'm making freudian slips and revealing a can of worms about what I'm really thinking inside my messed up head...when in fact I'm only using the wrong words and what I'm thinking inside my head is super cool wonderful sunshine daisy meadows
It's been a hot debate...and some things have been said on both sides...so I don't think I necessarily come off the worst here. I don't think we need to drag this out...I'm cool with everything...we're winding down to the closing number of posts now. I think the business has been done...all that's left is to send out good vibes, thank everyone for their interesting comments, still shocked that polygamy is actually illegal in so many countries...but there you go...and just wish you all sweet dreams...err but it being Fab I'm guessing that should be sweet wet dreams lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" We've evolved. " I disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
