FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Boundaries spoil the fun.
Boundaries spoil the fun.
Jump to: Newest in thread
We've spoken to so many women who are put off meeting couples because theyve been given rules or boundaries. We can't imagine it being much fun if everyone involved is not getting the full attention without fear of causing a drama.
The musketeers had it right.
One for all and all for one! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yea it's usually stuff you're not allowed to do with the male half of the couple, I'm just scared I'd forget and end up in a naked bitch fight with someone "
Exactly this.
No fun.
If a couple are playing with a single female or guy then surely the couple should be comfortable with whatever goes. We know that's not the case in most cases but when we started out we presumed it was normal to have no boundaries. Now we're more often than not told we are unique. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I always have ground rules and boundaries cos I think it makes it easier and more relaxing. "
I think that's fair enough and very different from you being given boundaries by the couple.
If you are given boundaries then does it not make you walk on egg shells? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No problem with boundaries or ground rules set down beforehand, if they set too many, use it as a filter"
Agreed. They're there to ensure nothing happens that anyone is uncomfortable with. After all it should be fun for everyone right? Even if they might appear unreasonable to you, they're there because it's what works for them. If they don't work for you or spoil your fun, then use your prerogative to look elsewhere  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No way in hell I'd meet a couple that said they had no boundaries. Sounds like they wouldn't respect mine!"
I'm talking about people who say things like.
I don't want you kissing him or he's only allowed to touch me.
As I said earlier it's different for the single person joining the couple. We're always mindful and careful to make the single lady as comfortable as possible. It must be scary enough meeting 2 people on your own without the thought you might be stepping on toes while in the heat of the moment.
That doesn't mean we ignore your boundaries or wishes. Quite the opposite.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No way in hell I'd meet a couple that said they had no boundaries. Sounds like they wouldn't respect mine!
I'm talking about people who say things like.
I don't want you kissing him or he's only allowed to touch me.
As I said earlier it's different for the single person joining the couple. We're always mindful and careful to make the single lady as comfortable as possible. It must be scary enough meeting 2 people on your own without the thought you might be stepping on toes while in the heat of the moment.
That doesn't mean we ignore your boundaries or wishes. Quite the opposite.
"
Fair enough. I didn't mean that *you* were disrespectful though, it was a generic comment.
For me it depends on how they explain their rules. If it was an adult conversation and straight forward "we have an agreed rule that he won't kiss you" then cool.
If she's 2 inches from my face spitting "don't fucking kiss my husband!!" then I run.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No way in hell I'd meet a couple that said they had no boundaries. Sounds like they wouldn't respect mine!
I'm talking about people who say things like.
I don't want you kissing him or he's only allowed to touch me.
As I said earlier it's different for the single person joining the couple. We're always mindful and careful to make the single lady as comfortable as possible. It must be scary enough meeting 2 people on your own without the thought you might be stepping on toes while in the heat of the moment.
That doesn't mean we ignore your boundaries or wishes. Quite the opposite.
Fair enough. I didn't mean that *you* were disrespectful though, it was a generic comment.
For me it depends on how they explain their rules. If it was an adult conversation and straight forward "we have an agreed rule that he won't kiss you" then cool.
If she's 2 inches from my face spitting "don't fucking kiss my husband!!" then I run. "
Haha I think I'd run too. But what a fun spoiler for a bisexual to be told they cannot get the full enjoyment from the experience of an encounter with both the male and female of the couple. Like some sort of forbidden fruit scenario. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No problem with boundaries or ground rules set down beforehand, if they set too many, use it as a filter
Agreed. They're there to ensure nothing happens that anyone is uncomfortable with. After all it should be fun for everyone right? Even if they might appear unreasonable to you, they're there because it's what works for them. If they don't work for you or spoil your fun, then use your prerogative to look elsewhere "
Yes I totally get that point of view. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We would never meet anyone, single or couple who claimed to have no boundaries. Everyone has boundaries.
Personally I think you stand more chance of upsetting someone who says they have no boundaries. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I get why people have boundaries ... and for example so would i ... no anal on meets for a start ... but yes when playng with a couple i would expect to be playing with both
I guess its about finding people with boundaries that match up with yours |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I get why people have boundaries ... and for example so would i ... no anal on meets for a start ... but yes when playng with a couple i would expect to be playing with both
I guess its about finding people with boundaries that match up with yours "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I get why people have boundaries ... and for example so would i ... no anal on meets for a start ... but yes when playng with a couple i would expect to be playing with both
I guess its about finding people with boundaries that match up with yours "
We too have do's and donts. Anal, bareback, pain and a range of other activities that some engage in.
We're quite vanilla compared to many on here.
I'm talking in terms of who is allowed to kiss, touch or play with who. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Surely dos and dont are just another way of saying boundaries though? It just happens that yours are more lenient than other who wont allow playing with the male half |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Boundaries and rules are fine, if they represent everyone being fully satisfied and potentially curtailed. Less so if there's an imbalance and potentially one side isn't the type to be interested in compromise or views the other as less than them in some way |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We have boundaries as it is what we are both comfortable with, as long as all parties involved know what they are before hand then their would be no issue xx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I get why people have boundaries ... and for example so would i ... no anal on meets for a start ... but yes when playng with a couple i would expect to be playing with both
I guess its about finding people with boundaries that match up with yours
We too have do's and donts. Anal, bareback, pain and a range of other activities that some engage in.
We're quite vanilla compared to many on here.
I'm talking in terms of who is allowed to kiss, touch or play with who. "
Then you do have boundaries. What you're saying is that people who have different boundaries to you spoil your fun but it just means you're not compatible. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I got bored talking to couples who said I'm only allowed to kiss the woman; there will be no penetration on me from him; he'll join in once me and the wife had given him his thrills. Not worth the trip. I can have a wank at home. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ucyfur77Woman
over a year ago
Pleasuretown |
"There's a few reasons why I don't meet couples
Which are?"
Asking to meet behind OH back
No pics of male half
Can be quite pushy/ turn sour when you say 'no thanks'
Bit cliche, but the whole performing seal thing
*Just my experience but it does really put you off*
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I always have ground rules and boundaries cos I think it makes it easier and more relaxing.
I think that's fair enough and very different from you being given boundaries by the couple.
If you are given boundaries then does it not make you walk on egg shells? "
Depends what they are. A 'no touching' rule to a straight man is easy to do but isn't very relaxing. No kissing the lady is easy but it's more fun to kiss. I have a strict 'no anal entry' for me and that's a very strict and enforced rule. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My idea of a threesome with a couple (which I've never had fully) would be kissing, oral and sex between all three of you. None of this "you can't kiss him" or "she won't give you oral but you can give her".. No thanks.
But I understand people have their limits as to who doesn't do what and it's a case of Frank discussion before meeting to find out and decide if you go ahead. Probably a reason why meeting couples is so hard!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ady LickWoman
over a year ago
Northampton Somewhere |
I've been put off meeting couples because I've been chatting and we've almost agreed to meet up then they've thrown in the no kissing, no penetration thing. I want to be able to go with the flow not be on edge in case I forget these things and upset someone!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *icentiousCouple
over a year ago
Up on them there hills |
Can't see the point in limiting yourselves, unless it cuts across values.
How do you grow if all you do is the same thing over and over again.
Like the saying: if you walk down the same path, you always arrive at the same place. The only thing that changes... The ruts get deeper. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've been put off meeting couples because I've been chatting and we've almost agreed to meet up then they've thrown in the no kissing, no penetration thing. I want to be able to go with the flow not be on edge in case I forget these things and upset someone!!!"
Please don't give up some of us love to do everything  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've been put off meeting couples because I've been chatting and we've almost agreed to meet up then they've thrown in the no kissing, no penetration thing. I want to be able to go with the flow not be on edge in case I forget these things and upset someone!!!
Please don't give up some of us love to do everything "
but you only play with the fem half of couples - thats not doing everything |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Our number 1 rule is...
Equal play, everyone involved with no boundaries apart from safe sex and no means no.....
We avoid the girl on girl, no kissing etc brigade and has served us well x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I got bored talking to couples who said I'm only allowed to kiss the woman; there will be no penetration on me from him; he'll join in once me and the wife had given him his thrills. Not worth the trip. I can have a wank at home."
We would have do, both the only allowed to kiss women, no penetration smacks of jealousy issues and best avoided, come play with us eh |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Think so long as the boundaries are clear, understood and accepted before anythig is arranged - then fair game.
Not everybody is into everything and different couples have different likes and dislikes. I think if eyes are open going in, then there's no issue. If the boundaries are not acceptable then just don't bother meeting in the first place.
We've had great fun on a meet where only Jen played with the couple. It was understood that that would be the case before a social meet, but we all got on so well it escalated quickly at least for the girls.
It'll be repeated I'm sure. But the geneal 'boundary' was known up front so can't complain. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I always have ground rules and boundaries cos I think it makes it easier and more relaxing. "
Nope, not for me. I'm sure it does for some, but I don't. I like freedom, and being able to do what I want and feel like at the time. If I need a snog and was told before I can t kiss.....arghh. There goes my mojo. And I get frustrated. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I always have ground rules and boundaries cos I think it makes it easier and more relaxing.
Nope, not for me. I'm sure it does for some, but I don't. I like freedom, and being able to do what I want and feel like at the time. If I need a snog and was told before I can t kiss.....arghh. There goes my mojo. And I get frustrated. "
Same here x I have 2 'rules'- safe sex and discretion. Anything else goes depending on the person/ situation  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yea it's usually stuff you're not allowed to do with the male half of the couple, I'm just scared I'd forget and end up in a naked bitch fight with someone "
I would absolutely love to watch you have a naked bitch fight...! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I wouldn't want too many boundaries, my idea of a meet is that everyone gets equal attention be that kissing, oral, penetration, toy play, I wouldn't want anyone to feel left out or as some have mentioned be the "performing seal", I wouldn't be happy with my partner having to sit out and wait for "his turn" per se, I would want us all kissing and sharing and generally having a fucking good time |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's a real shame some of you lovely ladies have been put off playing with couples. For us, an FFM is where everyone plays equally, no one left out of anything. It should be relaxed horny fun for all 3.
All the ones we have had have worked really well with all of us, including our lady friend having thoroughly enjoyed themselves 
Bun |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
No one should do what they dont want to. It can be off putting when there is a list of we don't and you mustn't etc. But boundaries must be respected; and sometimes they are fluid and some are fixed.
We on the other hand are quite relaxed and willing to be inclusive with everyone we play with....Otherwise we wouldn't be naked with you!
Bareback is a no, as are pee, poo, and blood play. Bumfun is not always on the cards. We just go with the flow and if its not right at any stage we politely stop and get our monkies and parrots together and leave.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
What I'm understanding from this is that if couples have boundaries its bad and limits everyone. Am I to understand that singles playing with couples should have no boundaries either? If so, how's that going to work?
When we've met single men (we don't meet single women, another pesky boundary but we're both straight so someone would be left out at some point) we try to find out what we all enjoy and concentrate on those things. If it becomes clear that there is very little common ground i.e. we all have boundaries that would make for limited enjoyment we don't take things any further. I honestly can't see where the problem lies in finding out boundaries beforehand and either respecting them or not meeting if you find them unacceptable. Every single person has boundaries they will not cross. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mojeeCouple
over a year ago
Dunfermline |
"Yea it's usually stuff you're not allowed to do with the male half of the couple, I'm just scared I'd forget and end up in a naked bitch fight with someone
Exactly this.
No fun.
If a couple are playing with a single female or guy then surely the couple should be comfortable with whatever goes. We know that's not the case in most cases but when we started out we presumed it was normal to have no boundaries. Now we're more often than not told we are unique. "
Surely the point about being comfortable is the fact you ARE comfortable and can relax and enjoy it more. We don't want to be made to feel uncomfortable in our own home on a meet. It most certainly is not the case of whatever goes and that doesn't appeal to us in the slightest. Our boundaries are simple and we'll be sticking to them . Be respectful condom always no male on male and cum on/over but never in just in case condom breaks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yea it's usually stuff you're not allowed to do with the male half of the couple, I'm just scared I'd forget and end up in a naked bitch fight with someone
Exactly this.
No fun.
If a couple are playing with a single female or guy then surely the couple should be comfortable with whatever goes. We know that's not the case in most cases but when we started out we presumed it was normal to have no boundaries. Now we're more often than not told we are unique.
Surely the point about being comfortable is the fact you ARE comfortable and can relax and enjoy it more. We don't want to be made to feel uncomfortable in our own home on a meet. It most certainly is not the case of whatever goes and that doesn't appeal to us in the slightest. Our boundaries are simple and we'll be sticking to them . Be respectful condom always no male on male and cum on/over but never in just in case condom breaks. "
I think everyone's boundaries are simple...to them. I'm getting from this thread that if someone's boundaries are different to yours they spoil the fun which at base is true, but why meet them? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *uzy444Woman
over a year ago
in the suffolk countryside |
i totally respect the boundaries of a couple, sometimes they suit me and sometimes they dont..it depends on the couple and how i get on with them..as to whether i play with the terms and conditions they offer.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *olliPineCouple
over a year ago
swingers clubs |
It's no fun when boundaries are crossed though, whether the other players know the boundaries or not, at least knowing the boundaries means crossing them was meant as disrespectful.
My comment isn't about FFM specifically but geerally.
'XX' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We started out with firm boundaries but then we soon realised that we were doing this stuff to enjoy ourselves and so others can enjoy it too. As such we don't have boundaries so long as we are all happy with the situation. I don't think we'd ever end up in a 'bitch fight' as we wouldn't get in the situation in the first place. We go to clubs etc with no expectations so should anything happen then we go along with it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You might be meaning barriers rather than boundaries. Boundaries are usually common preferences like no no anal or at least no atm. Barriers are more a sheer unwillingness to attempt any intimacy."
 That's a boundary too. If someone wants no intimacy and we've met lots of single men who don't, that's a boundary they're not willing to cross. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We don't have boundaries as such, if 1 of us wants to do something on a meet, they can do it. We very much go with the flow. We would never do watersports, scar or extreme pain they are things we just ain't into. But everyday things like anal, swallowing, creampie etc we are fine with and happy to do on any meet |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't have boundaries as such, if 1 of us wants to do something on a meet, they can do it. We very much go with the flow. We would never do watersports, scar or extreme pain they are things we just ain't into. But everyday things like anal, swallowing, creampie etc we are fine with and happy to do on any meet"
So you do have boundaries. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have lots of rules and preferences; those who do not like our rules or preferences will meet someone else; no big deal
- Mrs. J -"
Exactly! What seems to be being said on here is other people's boundaries are wrong and spoil everyone's fun but it's ok for certain individuals to have boundaries...in fact they aren't boundaries at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Reading all the comments would it be fair to say when it comes to boundaries like who can kiss or touch who, it usually centres around jealousy and more often than not the couple would both be straight? I know that's quite a presumption and there are bound to be couples who do not fit into that.
Our dynamic is straight male, bi fem couple and we only meet with bi females. This way everyone fancies everyone and wants equal play. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries."
It's a bit worrying how many people have said they prefer to have NO boundaries so they 'can do whatever they want'. So disrespectful.  So they can do whatever *they* want but sod what the other person wants cos if they say "no" they are being boring.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have lots of rules and preferences; those who do not like our rules or preferences will meet someone else; no big deal
- Mrs. J -
Exactly! What seems to be being said on here is other people's boundaries are wrong and spoil everyone's fun but it's ok for certain individuals to have boundaries...in fact they aren't boundaries at all. "
We definitely don't think it's wrong to have boundaries. We all have different relationships and emotions. What works for one couple can be dangerous for another. But obviously boundaries or restricting contact between individuals within the group who are playing surely makes for less fun if you are having to worry about upsetting someone with a kiss or touch. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries.
It's a bit worrying how many people have said they prefer to have NO boundaries so they 'can do whatever they want'. So disrespectful. So they can do whatever *they* want but sod what the other person wants cos if they say "no" they are being boring. "
I'm sure that isn't what they mean, obviously dialogue will be had but some people will have strict boundaries and others will be more relaxed with theirs, I'm not sure anyone has said "we will use you as we want and sod your needs"  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries.
It's a bit worrying how many people have said they prefer to have NO boundaries so they 'can do whatever they want'. So disrespectful. So they can do whatever *they* want but sod what the other person wants cos if they say "no" they are being boring. "
The word boundaries was originally meant in the context of excluding someone from the agreed actions rather than the act itself.
We certainly didn't mean forcing someone into anal or peeing on someone when they haven't agreed to such a thing.
A threesome should be exactly that. 3 people enjoying eachother equally. Not 2 people enjoying eachother while one sits in the corner or only touches their partner.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We all have things we like and don't like.You should never feel pressured to do something you don't like and don't want to do just for the selfish wants of other people.Thats not fun it's being used.The best times are spent with those that like the same things as you x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries.
It's a bit worrying how many people have said they prefer to have NO boundaries so they 'can do whatever they want'. So disrespectful. So they can do whatever *they* want but sod what the other person wants cos if they say "no" they are being boring.
The word boundaries was originally meant in the context of excluding someone from the agreed actions rather than the act itself.
We certainly didn't mean forcing someone into anal or peeing on someone when they haven't agreed to such a thing.
A threesome should be exactly that. 3 people enjoying eachother equally. Not 2 people enjoying eachother while one sits in the corner or only touches their partner.
"
No it shouldn't. That's my point!! It's whatever the 3 people agree to and want. I'd be happy with 2 women playing and the man watching. I've done that and we all enjoyed it. But clearly my wants and wishes mean fuck all because I'm doing it wrong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No way in hell I'd meet a couple that said they had no boundaries. Sounds like they wouldn't respect mine!"
This is exactly what I was thinking. Boundaries are put in place so that everyone knows what everyone else is comfortable with. There are things I like, such as kissing for example, that a couple might want to reserve for just themselves, and things they might like that I wouldn't do even if hell had frozen over (er, not that I believe in hell, but you get what I mean)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries.
It's a bit worrying how many people have said they prefer to have NO boundaries so they 'can do whatever they want'. So disrespectful. So they can do whatever *they* want but sod what the other person wants cos if they say "no" they are being boring.
The word boundaries was originally meant in the context of excluding someone from the agreed actions rather than the act itself.
We certainly didn't mean forcing someone into anal or peeing on someone when they haven't agreed to such a thing.
A threesome should be exactly that. 3 people enjoying eachother equally. Not 2 people enjoying eachother while one sits in the corner or only touches their partner.
No it shouldn't. That's my point!! It's whatever the 3 people agree to and want. I'd be happy with 2 women playing and the man watching. I've done that and we all enjoyed it. But clearly my wants and wishes mean fuck all because I'm doing it wrong. "
To be honest I think you're reading me wrong.
I agree that it should be what the 3 agree to. Of course it should.
And yes we have also been in the scenario of one watching while 2 play. You're not doing anything wrong by wanting that scenario. I'm just saying it's not as much fun. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This is why clubs work for us, we know the ladies we play with so well, this is because we have become friends first, so the likes and dislikes conversation has been had as a general chit chat way before even entering a play situation, we are all super comfortable with each other and we all spend time together regardless of playing or not playing, it works, we also find this with the couples we play with, haven't played with single guys yet so can't comment
For us it's a case of everyone has to be happy and comfortable at every level, it works
Mrs blue eyes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think the issue here is the blanket comment that boundaries spoil the fun in an ffm.
If the boundary is something that makes the single lady feel excluded, eg no kissing, no full sex between her and him, then I'd agree. It all needs to feel relaxed and open.
But you can't just say no boundaries. That implies she might get rough anal while the mrs pees on her. Nobody would go to a meet with 'no' boundaries.
It's a bit worrying how many people have said they prefer to have NO boundaries so they 'can do whatever they want'. So disrespectful. So they can do whatever *they* want but sod what the other person wants cos if they say "no" they are being boring.
The word boundaries was originally meant in the context of excluding someone from the agreed actions rather than the act itself.
We certainly didn't mean forcing someone into anal or peeing on someone when they haven't agreed to such a thing.
A threesome should be exactly that. 3 people enjoying eachother equally. Not 2 people enjoying eachother while one sits in the corner or only touches their partner.
No it shouldn't. That's my point!! It's whatever the 3 people agree to and want. I'd be happy with 2 women playing and the man watching. I've done that and we all enjoyed it. But clearly my wants and wishes mean fuck all because I'm doing it wrong.
To be honest I think you're reading me wrong.
I agree that it should be what the 3 agree to. Of course it should.
And yes we have also been in the scenario of one watching while 2 play. You're not doing anything wrong by wanting that scenario. I'm just saying it's not as much fun. "
You said "a threesome should be exactly that" and then gave a description of what a threesome *should* be.
My point is, my way IS fun for me. It's not fun for you. We're not compatible that's all. Neither of us is 'right'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I got bored talking to couples who said I'm only allowed to kiss the woman; there will be no penetration on me from him; he'll join in once me and the wife had given him his thrills. Not worth the trip. I can have a wank at home.
We would have do, both the only allowed to kiss women, no penetration smacks of jealousy issues and best avoided, come play with us eh"
This feeling from a single bi female and the response from a couple.
I couldn't agree more with you all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Time after time the boundaries question comes up in the forum and people hold there corner and opinions, everybody has boundaries even us, it's what you all agree to that count, some are reasonable and need little explanation, some seem strange and those are the people we avoid
Strange:-
No kissing so we can fuck but we can't kiss?
Girl in girl only why would hubby want to be in a room with someone that didn't want to play with him?
Reasonable:-
No anal, for some it hurts!
No piss play, for some it's disgusting
No poo play, I think I'd throw up
No pain, some don't like pain
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Time after time the boundaries question comes up in the forum and people hold there corner and opinions, everybody has boundaries even us, it's what you all agree to that count, some are reasonable and need little explanation, some seem strange and those are the people we avoid
Strange:-
No kissing so we can fuck but we can't kiss?
Girl in girl only why would hubby want to be in a room with someone that didn't want to play with him?
Reasonable:-
No anal, for some it hurts!
No piss play, for some it's disgusting
No poo play, I think I'd throw up
No pain, some don't like pain
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx"
Absolutely bang on. Thankyou. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Time after time the boundaries question comes up in the forum and people hold there corner and opinions, everybody has boundaries even us, it's what you all agree to that count, some are reasonable and need little explanation, some seem strange and those are the people we avoid
Strange:-
No kissing so we can fuck but we can't kiss?
Girl in girl only why would hubby want to be in a room with someone that didn't want to play with him?
Reasonable:-
No anal, for some it hurts!
No piss play, for some it's disgusting
No poo play, I think I'd throw up
No pain, some don't like pain
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx"
And some people don't give a fuck about what other people want. Worrying issues right there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Time after time the boundaries question comes up in the forum and people hold there corner and opinions, everybody has boundaries even us, it's what you all agree to that count, some are reasonable and need little explanation, some seem strange and those are the people we avoid
Strange:-
No kissing so we can fuck but we can't kiss?
Girl in girl only why would hubby want to be in a room with someone that didn't want to play with him?
Reasonable:-
No anal, for some it hurts!
No piss play, for some it's disgusting
No poo play, I think I'd throw up
No pain, some don't like pain
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx
And some people don't give a fuck about what other people want. Worrying issues right there."
Exactly and many people attempt to get what they want without consideration for others, that's not swinging, swinging is sharing, being considerate to others and all having fun xx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No way in hell I'd meet a couple that said they had no boundaries. Sounds like they wouldn't respect mine!"
this..
'boundaries' or preferences etc surely are about mutual respect and preventing awkward situations possibly whilst enabling fun to be had.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx"
I mostly agree with this ... but then a little bit of me thinks if a guy is happy to let his gf explore with other girls but doesnt get to participate because she is insecure about that ... well thats their own decision to be happy with and good luck to them ... i just wont be the 2nd girl in their ffm thats for sure |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Reading all the comments would it be fair to say when it comes to boundaries like who can kiss or touch who, it usually centres around jealousy and more often than not the couple would both be straight? I know that's quite a presumption and there are bound to be couples who do not fit into that.
Our dynamic is straight male, bi fem couple and we only meet with bi females. This way everyone fancies everyone and wants equal play. "
It is quite a presumption and an erroneous one. Your dynamic as a couple is individual to you and hopefully others respect that. Because another couple have a different dynamic doesn't mean it stems from jealousy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Time after time the boundaries question comes up in the forum and people hold there corner and opinions, everybody has boundaries even us, it's what you all agree to that count, some are reasonable and need little explanation, some seem strange and those are the people we avoid
Strange:-
No kissing so we can fuck but we can't kiss?
Girl in girl only why would hubby want to be in a room with someone that didn't want to play with him?
Reasonable:-
No anal, for some it hurts!
No piss play, for some it's disgusting
No poo play, I think I'd throw up
No pain, some don't like pain
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx"
Strange and reasonable to you, might be different to other people.
There is no such thing. Someones boundary is someones boundary, it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks of it, except those involved in the play. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Time after time the boundaries question comes up in the forum and people hold there corner and opinions, everybody has boundaries even us, it's what you all agree to that count, some are reasonable and need little explanation, some seem strange and those are the people we avoid
Strange:-
No kissing so we can fuck but we can't kiss?
Girl in girl only why would hubby want to be in a room with someone that didn't want to play with him?
Reasonable:-
No anal, for some it hurts!
No piss play, for some it's disgusting
No poo play, I think I'd throw up
No pain, some don't like pain
Trying. as some have in these threads to equate no kissing with no poo play for example, is rather ridiculous and frankly a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real issue here that many people being there insecurities, jeolusy issues and baggage into play situations rather than sorting them out first before involving others xxx"
Your definition of strange and reasonable should apply to us all and if we disagree we have insecurities and jealousy issues. Have I understood that correctly? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging. "
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We have very few boundaries other than pain and toilet related things. The big one is that Cal is very much straight and has no interest in any sexual interaction with a man.
However, we understand that everyone is different and would rather know up front.
That said, too many boundaries could be restrictive and reduce enjoyment. We usually just go with the flow and find that as long as everyone communicates, and says if something isn't for them, it works well.
Nita |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through."
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through.
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries) "
There's no problem there though is there? If a couple have boundaries that don't suit a single person they just don't meet.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through.
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries)
There's no problem there though is there? If a couple have boundaries that don't suit a single person they just don't meet.
"
Exactly. We have our rules and preferences; other couples or single women have their own
Unless those rules and preferences are a match, there is no point writing to us as there is no point in us writing to them
There are plenty who are a match for us and we meet them
- Mrs. J - |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through.
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries)
There's no problem there though is there? If a couple have boundaries that don't suit a single person they just don't meet.
Exactly. We have our rules and preferences; other couples or single women have their own
Unless those rules and preferences are a match, there is no point writing to us as there is no point in us writing to them
There are plenty who are a match for us and we meet them
- Mrs. J -"
In my opinion it's a simple question of mutual respect. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through.
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries) "
Perfect response x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I should also say (think i might have further up) ... i dont object to people having those boundaries ... i just know it doesnt match what i am there for so not for me |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through.
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries) "
Thank You. Although I think I made it obvious more than once and more than one person has recognised and pointed this out, some still choose to ignore or haven't taken the time to read the whole thread.
One of the many troubles of a forum discussion |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I've been put off meeting couples because I've been chatting and we've almost agreed to meet up then they've thrown in the no kissing, no penetration thing. I want to be able to go with the flow not be on edge in case I forget these things and upset someone!!!
Please don't give up some of us love to do everything
but you only play with the fem half of couples - thats not doing everything "
In regards to playing with a woman as it was the quote we replied to not the op. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We don't consider laying down rules etc. Anything goes with whoever as long as it's fun for everyone. If in a couples sense one is getting jealous, they really shouldn't be swinging.
I agree they shouldn't but the assumption that couples boundaries stem from jealousy doesn't apply to all couples.
One of my hard boundaries is that I won't be on the receiving end of oral sex, I simply don't like it. I'm happy to give, more than happy for Mr N to give to another woman but it's not for me. To suggest that's down to jealousy implies that it hasn't been thought through.
I suppose what the OP has been trying to get at is there is a difference between boundaries because its something you dont enjoy sexually and boundaries because its something you want to keep between you and your partner ... and maybe too many rules about whats to be kept with the partner comes across as the person joining just being fitted into a box for the couples satisfaction without much regard for their own enjoyment ... its why i just dont play with a couple unless its full play with both (within pleasure boundaries rather than possesive boundaries)
Thank You. Although I think I made it obvious more than once and more than one person has recognised and pointed this out, some still choose to ignore or haven't taken the time to read the whole thread.
One of the many troubles of a forum discussion "
Or some don't agree and are simply putting their point of view. That's what discussions are about. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I would disagree with some of the responses here, indeed very presumptuous, we don't kiss others, that's our choice, and it's certainly not down to jealousy issues, we just aren't big kissers, I don't really enjoy doing it, he feels similar, I do sometimes in the right mood enjoy a kiss but not often.
So because we don't do something we don't enjoy we are branded as insecure? I totally get it's not everyone's bag and that's absolutely fine, they can meet people who want to kiss and we will carry on meeting the people who are happy not to, everyone is a winner |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago
Hillside desolate |
"I would disagree with some of the responses here, indeed very presumptuous, we don't kiss others, that's our choice, and it's certainly not down to jealousy issues, we just aren't big kissers, I don't really enjoy doing it, he feels similar, I do sometimes in the right mood enjoy a kiss but not often.
So because we don't do something we don't enjoy we are branded as insecure? I totally get it's not everyone's bag and that's absolutely fine, they can meet people who want to kiss and we will carry on meeting the people who are happy not to, everyone is a winner "
Your profile says you don't kiss male to female, so presumably female to female is OK? Why the distinction if you don't really like kissing? I'm not having a go, genuinely curious |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I would disagree with some of the responses here, indeed very presumptuous, we don't kiss others, that's our choice, and it's certainly not down to jealousy issues, we just aren't big kissers, I don't really enjoy doing it, he feels similar, I do sometimes in the right mood enjoy a kiss but not often.
So because we don't do something we don't enjoy we are branded as insecure? I totally get it's not everyone's bag and that's absolutely fine, they can meet people who want to kiss and we will carry on meeting the people who are happy not to, everyone is a winner
Your profile says you don't kiss male to female, so presumably female to female is OK? Why the distinction if you don't really like kissing? I'm not having a go, genuinely curious "
Sometimes I like kissing women, it feels different to kissing men, strange I know, like I said I understand it's not everyone's cup of tea but happy to meet people who enjoy that too. I have no idea but I think if it was due to jealousy I'd have much more of a problem with him having sex with them but people are different |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia"
Exactly. Lack of empathy or respect for peoples boundaries (aka feelings) is a red flag itself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia
Exactly. Lack of empathy or respect for peoples boundaries (aka feelings) is a red flag itself."
Exactly. If you don't like their boundaries. Don't meet them. It really is that simple.
Slating people because of their preferences and boundaries just makes people come across as rude and that's not the sort of people you'd want to meet anyway.
~Mia |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We've spoken to so many women who are put off meeting couples because theyve been given rules or boundaries. We can't imagine it being much fun if everyone involved is not getting the full attention without fear of causing a drama.
The musketeers had it right.
One for all and all for one!"
I wear Aramis sometimes |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia
Exactly. Lack of empathy or respect for peoples boundaries (aka feelings) is a red flag itself.
Exactly. If you don't like their boundaries. Don't meet them. It really is that simple.
Slating people because of their preferences and boundaries just makes people come across as rude and that's not the sort of people you'd want to meet anyway.
~Mia"
I don't really understand that logic.
The fact we don't place restrictions on the women we meet and by that we mean telling her who she can or cannot touch or kiss does not therefore mean we do not respect anyone elses boundaries, likes and dislikes.
And we're certainly not slating anyone for having boundaries. We just don't think it would be as relaxed or as much fun, certainly for the person joining the couple if that person wants full interaction with both of us and we're telling her she can't.
Nothing wrong with placing restrictions on people. For some its important. But playing is fun and the more restrictions there are to playing, the less fun there is to be had.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia
Exactly. Lack of empathy or respect for peoples boundaries (aka feelings) is a red flag itself.
Exactly. If you don't like their boundaries. Don't meet them. It really is that simple.
Slating people because of their preferences and boundaries just makes people come across as rude and that's not the sort of people you'd want to meet anyway.
~Mia
I don't really understand that logic.
The fact we don't place restrictions on the women we meet and by that we mean telling her who she can or cannot touch or kiss does not therefore mean we do not respect anyone elses boundaries, likes and dislikes.
And we're certainly not slating anyone for having boundaries. We just don't think it would be as relaxed or as much fun, certainly for the person joining the couple if that person wants full interaction with both of us and we're telling her she can't.
Nothing wrong with placing restrictions on people. For some its important. But playing is fun and the more restrictions there are to playing, the less fun there is to be had.
"
But as many people have said to you, surely a single person who didn't agree with a couple's boundaries wouldn't meet them. So nobody is missing out on any fun.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X"
No kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things if that is what you want. For us no spanking or bondage limits things considerably but lots of people won't consider those things.
The point that is being missed over and over on this thread is that not everyone enjoys the same things. I am well aware that certain things are enjoyed by the majority of people but that doesn't mean those of us who play differently are limited. Imagine the indignation if I claimed that people who didn't allow me to spank them were spoiling my fun. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X
No kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things if that is what you want. For us no spanking or bondage limits things considerably but lots of people won't consider those things.
The point that is being missed over and over on this thread is that not everyone enjoys the same things. I am well aware that certain things are enjoyed by the majority of people but that doesn't mean those of us who play differently are limited. Imagine the indignation if I claimed that people who didn't allow me to spank them were spoiling my fun."
I haven't missed that point, which is why I said we are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play.
We would not rule out bdsm play either. However that takes a whole lot more trust and understanding than play that doesn't involve bdsm. It's certainly not something we would offer until that trust and understanding had been built. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X
No kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things if that is what you want. For us no spanking or bondage limits things considerably but lots of people won't consider those things.
The point that is being missed over and over on this thread is that not everyone enjoys the same things. I am well aware that certain things are enjoyed by the majority of people but that doesn't mean those of us who play differently are limited. Imagine the indignation if I claimed that people who didn't allow me to spank them were spoiling my fun.
I haven't missed that point, which is why I said we are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play.
We would not rule out bdsm play either. However that takes a whole lot more trust and understanding than play that doesn't involve bdsm. It's certainly not something we would offer until that trust and understanding had been built."
You wrote
"But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably."
It doesn't limit things for some people because they enjoy things other than that, which is the point I was making.
We only consider that people who want to kiss limit things for us...not the whole swinging population. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X
No kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things if that is what you want. For us no spanking or bondage limits things considerably but lots of people won't consider those things.
The point that is being missed over and over on this thread is that not everyone enjoys the same things. I am well aware that certain things are enjoyed by the majority of people but that doesn't mean those of us who play differently are limited. Imagine the indignation if I claimed that people who didn't allow me to spank them were spoiling my fun.
I haven't missed that point, which is why I said we are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play.
We would not rule out bdsm play either. However that takes a whole lot more trust and understanding than play that doesn't involve bdsm. It's certainly not something we would offer until that trust and understanding had been built.
You wrote
"But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably."
It doesn't limit things for some people because they enjoy things other than that, which is the point I was making.
We only consider that people who want to kiss limit things for us...not the whole swinging population."
As I said I'd be concerned if people had no limits atall. I've never heard of people that don't have limits even when they've claimed otherwise.
No kissing or limited contact between one partner or another does limit play. It just means that potentially if those limits have been discussed the people playing are happy to play within those limits.
Just the same as spanking, caning, flogging, restraint, breath play does if that is what you seek. It is all playing within agreed limits.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X
No kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things if that is what you want. For us no spanking or bondage limits things considerably but lots of people won't consider those things.
The point that is being missed over and over on this thread is that not everyone enjoys the same things. I am well aware that certain things are enjoyed by the majority of people but that doesn't mean those of us who play differently are limited. Imagine the indignation if I claimed that people who didn't allow me to spank them were spoiling my fun.
I haven't missed that point, which is why I said we are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play.
We would not rule out bdsm play either. However that takes a whole lot more trust and understanding than play that doesn't involve bdsm. It's certainly not something we would offer until that trust and understanding had been built.
You wrote
"But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably."
It doesn't limit things for some people because they enjoy things other than that, which is the point I was making.
We only consider that people who want to kiss limit things for us...not the whole swinging population.
As I said I'd be concerned if people had no limits atall. I've never heard of people that don't have limits even when they've claimed otherwise.
No kissing or limited contact between one partner or another does limit play. It just means that potentially if those limits have been discussed the people playing are happy to play within those limits.
Just the same as spanking, caning, flogging, restraint, breath play does if that is what you seek. It is all playing within agreed limits.
"
So we're saying the same thing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Claiming not to have boundaries when actually you do is confusing as fook I know that much.
I think I'd be concerned if someone had no boundaries at all.
But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably.
We are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play, ultimately we want whatever will allow everyone to be comfortable and get the most from our play time.
X
No kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things if that is what you want. For us no spanking or bondage limits things considerably but lots of people won't consider those things.
The point that is being missed over and over on this thread is that not everyone enjoys the same things. I am well aware that certain things are enjoyed by the majority of people but that doesn't mean those of us who play differently are limited. Imagine the indignation if I claimed that people who didn't allow me to spank them were spoiling my fun.
I haven't missed that point, which is why I said we are happy to discuss boundaries and what makes people happy to play.
We would not rule out bdsm play either. However that takes a whole lot more trust and understanding than play that doesn't involve bdsm. It's certainly not something we would offer until that trust and understanding had been built.
You wrote
"But do agree that the no kissing and limited contact between one party or another limits things considerably."
It doesn't limit things for some people because they enjoy things other than that, which is the point I was making.
We only consider that people who want to kiss limit things for us...not the whole swinging population.
As I said I'd be concerned if people had no limits atall. I've never heard of people that don't have limits even when they've claimed otherwise.
No kissing or limited contact between one partner or another does limit play. It just means that potentially if those limits have been discussed the people playing are happy to play within those limits.
Just the same as spanking, caning, flogging, restraint, breath play does if that is what you seek. It is all playing within agreed limits.
So we're saying the same thing? "
Yes I think we are lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
"
I like the ones where a couple advertises to meet another couple and then has a whooooole long list of what the other male can and can't do. Basically eliminating him from play...
What they mean is.... we want a single lady to play with and can't find one so we'll cut a male out of a couple instead.
Everyone has boundaries/limits it is simply a case of communicating and finding those that are compatible with your own. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ucyfur77Woman
over a year ago
Pleasuretown |
"Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia
Exactly. Lack of empathy or respect for peoples boundaries (aka feelings) is a red flag itself.
Exactly. If you don't like their boundaries. Don't meet them. It really is that simple.
Slating people because of their preferences and boundaries just makes people come across as rude and that's not the sort of people you'd want to meet anyway.
~Mia
I don't really understand that logic.
The fact we don't place restrictions on the women we meet and by that we mean telling her who she can or cannot touch or kiss does not therefore mean we do not respect anyone elses boundaries, likes and dislikes.
And we're certainly not slating anyone for having boundaries. We just don't think it would be as relaxed or as much fun, certainly for the person joining the couple if that person wants full interaction with both of us and we're telling her she can't.
Nothing wrong with placing restrictions on people. For some its important. But playing is fun and the more restrictions there are to playing, the less fun there is to be had.
But as many people have said to you, surely a single person who didn't agree with a couple's boundaries wouldn't meet them. So nobody is missing out on any fun.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We have lots of rules and preferences; those who do not like our rules or preferences will meet someone else; no big deal
- Mrs. J -
Exactly! What seems to be being said on here is other people's boundaries are wrong and spoil everyone's fun but it's ok for certain individuals to have boundaries...in fact they aren't boundaries at all.
We definitely don't think it's wrong to have boundaries. We all have different relationships and emotions. What works for one couple can be dangerous for another. But obviously boundaries or restricting contact between individuals within the group who are playing surely makes for less fun if you are having to worry about upsetting someone with a kiss or touch."
If we've understood what you mean right then yes we agree. Why do couples say they want to meet a female but then say only one or the other is going to play if your meeting as a couple then surly you should both be able to play. We would never arrange a meet with a couple or single fem and say that one of us couldn't join equally in the fun. We usually take that the one who can't join in is just trying to the other happy and that's not for us
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have lots of rules and preferences; those who do not like our rules or preferences will meet someone else; no big deal
- Mrs. J -
Exactly! What seems to be being said on here is other people's boundaries are wrong and spoil everyone's fun but it's ok for certain individuals to have boundaries...in fact they aren't boundaries at all.
We definitely don't think it's wrong to have boundaries. We all have different relationships and emotions. What works for one couple can be dangerous for another. But obviously boundaries or restricting contact between individuals within the group who are playing surely makes for less fun if you are having to worry about upsetting someone with a kiss or touch.
If we've understood what you mean right then yes we agree. Why do couples say they want to meet a female but then say only one or the other is going to play if your meeting as a couple then surly you should both be able to play. We would never arrange a meet with a couple or single fem and say that one of us couldn't join equally in the fun. We usually take that the one who can't join in is just trying to the other happy and that's not for us
"
That's why it's important to make sure people know where each other's boundaries lie. We learned that the hard way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We have lots of rules and preferences; those who do not like our rules or preferences will meet someone else; no big deal
- Mrs. J -
Exactly! What seems to be being said on here is other people's boundaries are wrong and spoil everyone's fun but it's ok for certain individuals to have boundaries...in fact they aren't boundaries at all.
We definitely don't think it's wrong to have boundaries. We all have different relationships and emotions. What works for one couple can be dangerous for another. But obviously boundaries or restricting contact between individuals within the group who are playing surely makes for less fun if you are having to worry about upsetting someone with a kiss or touch.
If we've understood what you mean right then yes we agree. Why do couples say they want to meet a female but then say only one or the other is going to play if your meeting as a couple then surly you should both be able to play. We would never arrange a meet with a couple or single fem and say that one of us couldn't join equally in the fun. We usually take that the one who can't join in is just trying to the other happy and that's not for us
"
Yes you understand me correctly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We've spoken to so many women who are put off meeting couples because theyve been given rules or boundaries. We can't imagine it being much fun if everyone involved is not getting the full attention without fear of causing a drama.
The musketeers had it right.
One for all and all for one!"
I tend to agree with you OP. I explained to a new playmate recently, who was keen to establish what our boundaries were, that we don't really have rules and boundaries. I won't do something if I don't like it, but I don't feel the need to list all the things that I don't want to do. Partly because I might forget something, and partly because I might change my mind. We do get a bit twitchy if we're not treated as a couple, but that's not really a boundary, that's just swing etiquette. We find it works for us to go with the flow and address things as they come up.
Mrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just preferences I guess. We have our rules for a reason. If people don't like them then they don't have to meet us. Simple as really.
People have their rules and boundaries for a reason. Just keep that in mind.
~Mia
Exactly. Lack of empathy or respect for peoples boundaries (aka feelings) is a red flag itself.
Exactly. If you don't like their boundaries. Don't meet them. It really is that simple.
Slating people because of their preferences and boundaries just makes people come across as rude and that's not the sort of people you'd want to meet anyway.
~Mia
I don't really understand that logic.
The fact we don't place restrictions on the women we meet and by that we mean telling her who she can or cannot touch or kiss does not therefore mean we do not respect anyone elses boundaries, likes and dislikes.
And we're certainly not slating anyone for having boundaries. We just don't think it would be as relaxed or as much fun, certainly for the person joining the couple if that person wants full interaction with both of us and we're telling her she can't.
Nothing wrong with placing restrictions on people. For some its important. But playing is fun and the more restrictions there are to playing, the less fun there is to be had.
But as many people have said to you, surely a single person who didn't agree with a couple's boundaries wouldn't meet them. So nobody is missing out on any fun.
"
Exactly. They have fun within their boundaries which is fine.
And what I meant was questioning people's boundaries and that comes across as rude to me. You may have not meant it in that way but that's how I took it.
You may well be completely respectful about boundaries but it didn't come across that way is all.
~Mia |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No problem with boundaries or ground rules set down beforehand, if they set too many, use it as a filter
Agreed. They're there to ensure nothing happens that anyone is uncomfortable with. After all it should be fun for everyone right? Even if they might appear unreasonable to you, they're there because it's what works for them. If they don't work for you or spoil your fun, then use your prerogative to look elsewhere "
Exactly this. After all, why would you want to meet a couple/individual who's requirements are completely different to yours? Or risk genuinely harming someone because their body isn't used to what you've got planned in your boundary free do anything world. We certainly meet anyone like the OP. Imagine someone turning up at your home and saying "I know you have set boundaries, but I'm going to ignore them all and do what I want and sod your wishes". We're sure the meet wouldn't progress very far. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No problem with boundaries or ground rules set down beforehand, if they set too many, use it as a filter
Agreed. They're there to ensure nothing happens that anyone is uncomfortable with. After all it should be fun for everyone right? Even if they might appear unreasonable to you, they're there because it's what works for them. If they don't work for you or spoil your fun, then use your prerogative to look elsewhere
Exactly this. After all, why would you want to meet a couple/individual who's requirements are completely different to yours? Or risk genuinely harming someone because their body isn't used to what you've got planned in your boundary free do anything world. We certainly meet anyone like the OP. Imagine someone turning up at your home and saying "I know you have set boundaries, but I'm going to ignore them all and do what I want and sod your wishes". We're sure the meet wouldn't progress very far. "
Have you even read the thread ? Thats in no way what the OP was suggesting and they have clarified multiple times |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"No problem with boundaries or ground rules set down beforehand, if they set too many, use it as a filter
Agreed. They're there to ensure nothing happens that anyone is uncomfortable with. After all it should be fun for everyone right? Even if they might appear unreasonable to you, they're there because it's what works for them. If they don't work for you or spoil your fun, then use your prerogative to look elsewhere
Exactly this. After all, why would you want to meet a couple/individual who's requirements are completely different to yours? Or risk genuinely harming someone because their body isn't used to what you've got planned in your boundary free do anything world. We certainly meet anyone like the OP. Imagine someone turning up at your home and saying "I know you have set boundaries, but I'm going to ignore them all and do what I want and sod your wishes". We're sure the meet wouldn't progress very far. "
I don't think requirements are the same as boundaries. Also as a couple who avoids setting hard boundaries, we don't really feel that we are at risk of someone harming us, because we would just say no at the time.
Mrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"No problem with boundaries or ground rules set down beforehand, if they set too many, use it as a filter
Agreed. They're there to ensure nothing happens that anyone is uncomfortable with. After all it should be fun for everyone right? Even if they might appear unreasonable to you, they're there because it's what works for them. If they don't work for you or spoil your fun, then use your prerogative to look elsewhere
Exactly this. After all, why would you want to meet a couple/individual who's requirements are completely different to yours? Or risk genuinely harming someone because their body isn't used to what you've got planned in your boundary free do anything world. We certainly meet anyone like the OP. Imagine someone turning up at your home and saying "I know you have set boundaries, but I'm going to ignore them all and do what I want and sod your wishes". We're sure the meet wouldn't progress very far.
Have you even read the thread ? Thats in no way what the OP was suggesting and they have clarified multiple times "
I hope they haven't read the thread or we're giving up on forums altogether |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
"
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs"
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
"
That's decent. One of the issues being discussed is that many couples don't show that sort of consideration resulting in singles being put off meeting couples. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
That's decent. One of the issues being discussed is that many couples don't show that sort of consideration resulting in singles being put off meeting couples. "
Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is that while saying that boundaries restrict enjoyment it's the failure to discuss or establish boundaries that leads to people being in the position of discovering them mid-play. If a couple have restrictions, boundaries or limits that a single person objects to or vice versa(singles have boundaries too), why are they meeting in the first place? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
That's decent. One of the issues being discussed is that many couples don't show that sort of consideration resulting in singles being put off meeting couples.
Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is that while saying that boundaries restrict enjoyment it's the failure to discuss or establish boundaries that leads to people being in the position of discovering them mid-play. If a couple have restrictions, boundaries or limits that a single person objects to or vice versa(singles have boundaries too), why are they meeting in the first place?"
I guess everybody's different. We prefer not to discuss boundaries and find it more enjoyable to go with the flow. Our starting point is that we don't have boundaries, but of course we do if we really analyse it. We are more likely to discuss what we do like. It is nearly always couples that have restrictions and boundaries, and rarely singles, though singles do indeed have the choice whether they are happy with the situation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
That's decent. One of the issues being discussed is that many couples don't show that sort of consideration resulting in singles being put off meeting couples.
Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is that while saying that boundaries restrict enjoyment it's the failure to discuss or establish boundaries that leads to people being in the position of discovering them mid-play. If a couple have restrictions, boundaries or limits that a single person objects to or vice versa(singles have boundaries too), why are they meeting in the first place?
I guess everybody's different. We prefer not to discuss boundaries and find it more enjoyable to go with the flow. Our starting point is that we don't have boundaries, but of course we do if we really analyse it. We are more likely to discuss what we do like. It is nearly always couples that have restrictions and boundaries, and rarely singles, though singles do indeed have the choice whether they are happy with the situation. "
As was said before, the key word is "exclusion"
We're no different in discussing do's and donts before a meeting but none of those do's and donts are aimed at and exclude an individual.
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. That is of course unless someone expresses a desire to be a taker rather than a giver |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
That's decent. One of the issues being discussed is that many couples don't show that sort of consideration resulting in singles being put off meeting couples.
Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is that while saying that boundaries restrict enjoyment it's the failure to discuss or establish boundaries that leads to people being in the position of discovering them mid-play. If a couple have restrictions, boundaries or limits that a single person objects to or vice versa(singles have boundaries too), why are they meeting in the first place?
I guess everybody's different. We prefer not to discuss boundaries and find it more enjoyable to go with the flow. Our starting point is that we don't have boundaries, but of course we do if we really analyse it. We are more likely to discuss what we do like. It is nearly always couples that have restrictions and boundaries, and rarely singles, though singles do indeed have the choice whether they are happy with the situation.
As was said before, the key word is "exclusion"
We're no different in discussing do's and donts before a meeting but none of those do's and donts are aimed at and exclude an individual.
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. That is of course unless someone expresses a desire to be a taker rather than a giver "
Agreed. Our view is that anything we are prepared to do with each, then there is no reason why we wouldn't consider the same with another partner once the the comfort level had built up. I've never had a single guy say to us 'I'll do ..... with you, but I won't do .....' (with the exception of backback and more extreme levels of play of course), therefore why would we put restrictions out? It does seem be be a couples thing.
Mrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think its gone off on a tangent talking about genres of sexual activities. All agreeing to certain activity is one thing and an obviously fair thing to do.
Placing a boundary or limit or whatever you want to call it on an individual in a group while the rest engage in whatever activity is exclusion. If I were a single bisexual person and I had found a couple I found attractive and I wanted to meet and they told me I could look but not touch one of them then I would consider the fun spoilt and would think twice about meeting that couple.
I think 'exclusion' is the key word. Of course we all have boundaries. But as a couple who regularly invites single men to join us, I can't get my head round excluding them from an activity, and yet doing that activity in front of them with my husband. To me that just is not the way to treat a guest. As a matter of principle, we will make sure anybody we play with is not subject to exclusion, and this respect we show our guests is appreciated.
Mrs
If we ask a guy we're playing with not to do something we don't do it ourselves either.
That's decent. One of the issues being discussed is that many couples don't show that sort of consideration resulting in singles being put off meeting couples.
Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is that while saying that boundaries restrict enjoyment it's the failure to discuss or establish boundaries that leads to people being in the position of discovering them mid-play. If a couple have restrictions, boundaries or limits that a single person objects to or vice versa(singles have boundaries too), why are they meeting in the first place?
I guess everybody's different. We prefer not to discuss boundaries and find it more enjoyable to go with the flow. Our starting point is that we don't have boundaries, but of course we do if we really analyse it. We are more likely to discuss what we do like. It is nearly always couples that have restrictions and boundaries, and rarely singles, though singles do indeed have the choice whether they are happy with the situation.
As was said before, the key word is "exclusion"
We're no different in discussing do's and donts before a meeting but none of those do's and donts are aimed at and exclude an individual.
Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. That is of course unless someone expresses a desire to be a taker rather than a giver
Agreed. Our view is that anything we are prepared to do with each, then there is no reason why we wouldn't consider the same with another partner once the the comfort level had built up. I've never had a single guy say to us 'I'll do ..... with you, but I won't do .....' (with the exception of backback and more extreme levels of play of course), therefore why would we put restrictions out? It does seem be be a couples thing.
Mrs"
Definitely a couples thing. The hazards of group sex when there's a love interest. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
