U.K. Swingers Club Fights Closure Order By Claiming Club Boosts Local Economy
|
Posted:Sep 6, 2014 8:27 am
Last Updated:Jan 13, 2016 9:56 am
43735 Views
|
Business trade organizations often put out “studies” – the quality and validity of the research varies greatly – that claim the industry in question, (hotels, hot stands, floor waxes, dessert toppings, or what have you) adds significantly to the economy. These studies are very useful in government lobbying efforts, as well as in attracting more members to the sponsoring organizations.
Problem is, when one adds up all the extra-generated value these studies claim, the combined dollars supposedly generated are considerably more value than the U.S. gross national product – which is, of course, impossible. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
A reporter once cornered the chief economist at a marketing advocacy organization and asked exactly what went into generating that organization’s figures. In an effort to flatter (and misdirect) the reporter, the economist beamed, shook the reporter’s hand, and said “You know, people received the Nobel Prize in Economics for asking just such a question.”
“No,” the reporter replied. “People received the Nobel Prize in Economics for answering just such a question.” And the interview continued, much to the subject’s discomfort.
So while I take these types of claims with a very large grain of salt, it’s still gratifying to see ‘em applied to the swinging community. In an online article titled “Swingers’ club ‘supports other businesses’ claim,” the Blackpool Gazette reported that Chris Maher, owner of the club Blackpool Connections, made exactly that sort of claim as part of the fight to keep his business open. The town council alleges he does not have the proper licenses to operate a swing club.
But this does not daunt Maher, who sees his club as a booster for the local economy. “As many as 40 hotel rooms a week are booked up because of my sauna,” he claimed, according to an early June article Blackpool Gazette. “Cafes are being used, shops are being used, there’s a knock-on effect.”
Love those knock-on effects! But why stop at naming hotel rooms specifically? Druggists are presumably selling condoms (which the British call “French letters” or “johnnys”) and mouthwash to swingers, no? Swingers have to eat, too: Chances are local restaurants are doing a smart business in the sandwiches known in northern England as “buttys”. Taxi services certainly are benefiting as well, one might imagine.
Don’t take my word for it: “If I close down, it’s not just me that suffers – the economy of Blackpool that will suffer,” Maher added.
Maher is apparently marshaling other local businesses around him. Norman Gillies, who owns the deliciously named nearby Tuck In Café, told the Blackpool Gazette that “[Maher’s] customers come in on a Sunday morning and they will spend £20 – it’s not a lot but it’s not a busy cafe and it goes a long way.”
“They come in here, they are not rude, it’s not a big deal for us,” Gillies added. “I certainly support his efforts to stay open – at the end of the day all you’re going to have is an empty property.”
“I have got five people who work for me who are going to be on the dole because of this,” Maher claimed. Blackpool boasts a population of 142,100 – those five would have to be absorbed into the town’s labor force, should the club close.
Maher is prepared to take some radical steps to make sure that doesn’t happen. In a late-August follow-up story in the Blackpool Gazette (“Sex club boss vows to fight”), he proclaimed “I am not going to take this lying down – I am going to chain myself to the doors of the town hall.”
Additional reports as to whether Maher made good on his threat, or what he takes lying down as part of his club duties, were not available.
On a separate publishing-related note: Gotta love those not-quite-right efforts at contextually placed ads. The banner spot that accompanied this article the first time I accessed it urged me to “find love online”.
It was for The Shelter Pet Project dot org – a pet adoption service.
|
|
|
11
Comments
|
|
Age and Amorousness: A Survey of Swingers (Part of the Virtual Symposium)
|
Posted:Sep 2, 2014 10:31 am
Last Updated:Oct 16, 2021 3:56 pm
43839 Views
|
This blog entry is part of the first virtual symposium, an informal collection of bloggers who – purely for the hell of it – voted on a single topic (Age and Amorousness) and agreed, on or about Sept. 2, to post their interpretations of that topic. A continually updated list of participants can be found here: Participants List For The First Virtual Symposium Age And Amorousness
One of the best attempts to codify the swinging community – to really get a handle on what its participants look like – was done by Edward M. Fernandes, who is now an assistant professor of psychology at Barton College. In late 2008 he published “The Swinging Paradigm: An Evaluation of the Marital and Sexual Satisfaction of Swingers,” which was based partly on a series of online surveys.
I’ve got some basic quibbles with Fernandes. In his paper, he says that “Since there is little information regarding how individual male and female swingers evaluate their swinging experience, this study considers individual men and women swingers and not couples…” But the actual survey is written for swingers who swing as couples, or who at least are in couples. It doesn’t have options that comfortably fit how single swingers might answer. Furthermore, in his letter to webmasters, Fernandes states that the criteria for survey participation “are that participants must be: (1) over the age of 18, and (2) currently married or living together.”
Fair’s fair: This most-likely unintentional bias reflects a bias held by some in the community who feel the only “real” swingers are couples who play… although what designation the solo people who play with them in threesomes should have eludes me.
This complaint aside, though, Fernandes’s study represents some of the best academic explorations of the swinging community I’ve found. The paper offers an overview of the work that came before his. It’s a balanced view: In once case he cites a study which found that “couples that participated in swinging activities reported having strong, loving, and committed relationships, and lived otherwise traditional family lives,” but notes that “the assertions made by [that study’s author] were anecdotal at best and relied on his interviews with a small number of swingers at a swinger's resort in the west coast.”
Waitaminute. Aren’t we supposed to be talking about Age and Amorousness?
Well, yeah. But this blog's overall focus is how swingers are portrayed in the media. Furthermore, I’m a statistics nerd, and some of the more interesting aspects of the paper included a review of previously reported demographic and psychographic/attitudinal data, as well as that collected through Fernandes’s survey.
For instance, 1971 data showed that swingers at a national swinging conference had a mean (average) age of 30, with a range between 28 and 45, while a 1988 study found swingers had a mean age of 40.7.
Why the difference? Hard to know for sure, but it may be partly due to the way the data was collected – there’s no guarantee that intercepting people at a conference, as was done in 1971, will get a truly representative sample. It could be that younger swingers were more likely to attend a conference. Or it could be that in 1971, with the counterculture still running at full strength, swinging was a younger person’s game – at least, on average.
Speaking of averages, if swingers’ ages ran the gauntlet between 28 and 45 in a sample, one would think the average would be a bit higher than 30 – and, in fact, other research done in 1998 put the figure at the late 30s.
For his 2008 paper, Fernandes drew on surveys completed between February and March of that year among paying members of dating sites or clubs. (Temporary and free members weren’t given access to the survey link.) I’ll probably explore some of the other study findings in another post, but here’s the nut graph:
“The average range of ages of both men and women was between thirty-six and forty-five years of age, and the sample was predominantly white. Less than 1% of the respondents were under twenty-five years of age; and about .3% of the sample was over the age of sixty-five.”
I can see people in their early 20s holding off on swinging, or at least self-identifying as swingers… but wow! Zero point three percent of the sample was over 65? As it happens, Fernandes’s own research revealed that just over 4 percent of the male respondents were over 65, while nearly 2 percent of the females were.
There’s a second quibble I have with Fernandes’s work: When he cites his statistical findings about the swinging community, he doesn’t give national (or, at least, North American) averages. He did collect and aggregate geographic data about participants, and I realize that by breaking down his sample he might lose some respondents… but knowing how close to “normal” swingers are would have been very interesting (again, to a statistics nerd).
Here are the age breakouts from Fernandes’s survey (apologies for the eyestrain -- this blog interface isn't really set up for tables... and anyway, what sort of deviated prevert brings data tables into a swingers' blog?):
Age of Participants
Male % Female %
Under 25 -- .9 -- 3.9
25 to 35 -- 16.2 -- 25.2
36 to 45 -- 29.2 -- 42.4
46 to 55 -- 32.3 -- 21.5
56 to 65 -- 17.2 -- 5.2
Over 65 -- 4.2 -- 1.8
And here, for good luck, are the same data based off the 2010 U.S. Census (apologies to my Canadian and other international readers – I may include the Canadian data soon, given this site’s strong Canadian footprint.) Note: for “Under 25” I included data from the 20-24 year old group, but excluded the 15 to 19 group: The Census breaks don’t line up perfectly with Fernandes, alas…
Male % Female %
20-24 -- 10.1 -- 9.1
25 to 34 -- 18.9 -- 17.6
35 to 44 -- 18.7 -- 17.7
45 to 54 -- 20.3 -- 19.7
55 to 64 -- 16.1 -- 18.5
Over 65 -- 15.9 -- 17.4
My gut – and this is dangerous ground, because gut work has no place in statistics – but my gut says that Fernandes’s figures for swinging participation among the over 65 set are out of date – and low. Would love to see someone prove or disprove it…
A final note, regarding Age and Amorousness: Age can refer to a person, but it can also refer to the age – or length – of a relationship. Think swinging is inherently detrimental to a relationship? Here are Fernandes’s findings regarding the length of time swingers were in their relationships as of 2008:
Response to the Question “How Long Have You Been in the Present Relationship?”
Male % Female %
Less than One Year -- 4.3 -- 4.6
1 to 3 years -- 9.8 -- 13.8
4 to 7 years -- 16.0 -- 19.6
8 to 10 years -- 9.8 -- 9.8
11 to 15 years -- 17.3 -- 14.4
16 to 20 years -- 12.2 -- 12.9
Over 20 years -- 30.6 -- 24.2
|
|
|
24
Comments
|
|
Participants List For The First Virtual Symposium: Age And Amorousness
|
Posted:Sep 1, 2014 10:52 pm
Last Updated:Jul 24, 2015 5:05 am
38809 Views
|
Welcome to the first virtual symposium, an informal collection of bloggers who – purely for the hell of it – voted on a single topic (Age and Amorousness) and agreed, on or about Sept. 2, to post their interpretations of that topic. There are no prizes or awards, save for the opportunity to build a more-closely knit blog community. All bloggers are invited to participate in this, as well as all future, virtual symposiums. To participate, watch this blog for future symposium topics: We anticipate doing one per month.
The rules, such as they are, are simple: Once a topic was picked, all bloggers were and are invited to interpret the topic as loosely as they choose, and offer any type of post they like which either tangentially or directly addresses the topic, whether through fantasy/fiction, essay, photographs, image collages, poems, one-liners, or any other form they choose. Contact me to be included on this list, which I will update as new participants make themselves known.
We (that’s the editorial we – or perhaps I have a tapeworm) hope readers will use these virtual forums to discover new, interesting voices. A request of readers: If you find an entry you especially like, please don’t be shy about leaving an attaboy/attagirl on the appropriate blog. Applause never hurts!
A continually updated list of participants can be found below: Please check back often, as I’ll add new posts as often as appropriate (and as other responsibilities allow). Feel free to toss me an email if I haven’t included your submission!
Note: The site's system is being temperamental about posting hot links: Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't... sometimes they take a few attempts. I've notified IT about it... if a link isn't hot, please track down the appropriate blogs. They're worth it.
In no particular order at all, our participants include:
Osphena: My Adventure as Osphena [post 3476473]
Abb145: Scribbles [post 3476521]
Kzoopair: Take two- they're small A Treatise on Age and Amorousness
SexySexySophie: Sophie's World [post 3476612]
Itaintagame: Live from the dug out The Journey Age and Amorousness
Wyckedsxxxy: Thundercunting [post 3476673]
TicklePlease: Refried Confusion A groundbreaking new cure for LowA
N_Joimi: Driving for Fun Lust, Amorousness, And Evolution
PeterLongHenry: Whispers NSA Not Seeking Amorousness
_Lady_X_: Long, Cool Drink of Intention [post 3476769]
fun_tchr951: tread lightly [post 3476794]
dnafun11: Observations [post 3476805]
sweet_VM: In your Dreams First Virtual Symposium Age and AmorousnessAs Daddy Sleeps
hardhardtony: The Be a BETTER MAN Blog [post 3476820]
Humorguaranteed: Confessions of a Lifestyle Man Age and Amorousness A Survey of Swingers Part of the Virtual Symposium
KItkat1415: Kinks and High Jinks [post 3476891]
missingu2012: LIFE is for Living and Loving Age and Amorousness Is The Topic For The First Virtual Symposium On Sept 2
Eros_Space: LOVE AND ROCKETS [post 3477077]
demonicsexkitten: Life, or something like it Age and Amorousness
SnuggleBuni41: Bag of Smashed Assholes [post 3477225]
lil_whimsical: Whatever [post 3477492]
misssquirtsALOT Normal By Day Naughty By Night [post 3477275]
misssquirtsALOT (Yes, a second post on the topic!) Normal By Day Naughty By Night [post 3477725]
Rakehell500 Rakehell for the Heck of It On Age and Amourousness
spudluvr: The Other Side of the Hill Age and Amorousness
NoMoreMrStr8Guy Rocking Blog or Not [post 3476889]
Keep 'em coming, folks!
Wow! This idea has caught on like prairie fire within the blogosphere... so much so that people have written posts without letting me know so I can link to 'em. If you see a related post that ain't on here, please let me know so we can give credit for effort where due!
|
|
|
15
Comments
|
|
“Age and Amorousness” Is The Topic For The First Virtual Symposium On Sept. 2!
|
Posted:Aug 27, 2014 7:39 am
Last Updated:Sep 3, 2014 8:48 pm
39318 Views
|
Well, folks, the masses – or, at least, a double handful of masses – have spoken, and the topic of the first virtual symposium will be “Age and Amorousness.”
Here’s how the symposium will work: All choosing to participate – a field which includes everyone who has a blog – will create something – an essay, an erotic story, a memoir, a series of one-line aphorisms, an image collage, a photo montage, a poem, or anything else – relating to “Age and Amorousness”.
Feel free to take the basic idea and stretch it to as wild an interpretation as you like -- the post should reflect you! The last thing we need is a dozen monotonous texts on the same topic. Anything goes, as long as there is a trace of the original idea in the post.
On the morning of Sept. 2 (a Tuesday, for those keeping score), all participants will post their creations.
The idea is to create something new, as opposed to using posts to respond to other posts (although the comments section will, of course, remain fair game). Ping me, and I’ll use a post on that day to link to all posts.
A suggestion: Participants may want to refer to either the virtual symposium or the topic itself in their headline. Not a requirement – there are no requirements, save for originality and participation – but a suggestion which will let the wide blog community know what we’re doing.
And… this is not a contest. No souvenir mugs will be sent, nor ribbons awarded. The idea here is for those interested to, on a single day, offer an interpretation of a single topic for the sheer fun of it.
By all means, encourage other bloggers to participate – and to let me know they’re doing so, either through this post or via email, so on Sept. 2 I can link to their posts.
Remember, of course, to keep things in your voice!
Can’t wait to see the results!
|
|
|
28
Comments
(Page:)
|
|
|
|
Fellow Bloggers: Interested In A Virtual Symposium?
|
Posted:Aug 24, 2014 8:39 am
Last Updated:Nov 8, 2017 9:43 am
34936 Views
|
This site’s blogging community offers an incredible variety of posts and posting styles. Many offer deeply personal insights, others share song lyrics and poems that reflect their current states. Bloggers can offer historical takes on subjects related, quasi-related, and not-at-all related to sex, and some provide commentary on news items. Sometimes bloggers move out of the word-based spectrum by providing photo essays and digital collages.
For the most part, we’re all running off in different directions – and that’s healthy. There’s usually no deadline pressure (save for the ones we put on ourselves), and no requirement to post on a specific topic.
Would bloggers be interested, once in a very rare while, in shaking this up?
Here’s what I have in mind: We collectively pick a topic, or a question We pick a specific date on which we all commit to posting… something. As I mentioned above, it doesn’t even have to be text: It could be images... as long as it is, even very loosely, related to the topic.
I’d be happy, at least for the first one, to coordinate: I’d start a placeholder post, and as people put their takes up, they’d notify me and I’d incorporate links into that central post – although participants would be encouraged to note that they’re part of a communal effort on that day. This would allow someone who stumbles on one such blog item to enjoy as many of our pieces as he/she wants… and would further strengthen a sense of virtual community.
What this wouldn’t be: A competition. There would be no prizes, no souvenir mugs given out… just the fun of commenting, as part of a group, on a topic which might be outside our normal purview.
The only two rules I would offer – and again this would be up for discussion – would be: A ) Please post as early on the chosen day as possible, to allow for maximum exposure, and B ) the posts should be entirely original, as opposed to commenting on other posts from the topic. Ideally, posts should be created beforehand, and put on the site on the designated day. (The comments section, of course, would be fair game!)
So…
What do folks think? Who would be interested in participating? What topic would be fun to write about – or useful for the blog community, if we want to offer our perspectives as a service – and what date should we choose?
|
|
|
18
Comments
|
|
Yikers! Sex Advice Columnist Suggests Porn As Swinger Information Source
|
Posted:Aug 22, 2014 8:36 am
Last Updated:Nov 8, 2017 1:23 pm
33468 Views
|
There are no stupid questions… but every once in a while, one stumbles across a really stupid answer from a source who should know better.
Take an advice column which ran on Aug. 19 in the Sunday World under the headline “My husband and I would like to try swinging.” What advice does relationship and sex columnist Maura O’Neill offer a 50-something couple who want to “have a once-off with another couple or singles”?
“Have you watched any porn to give you an idea of how this arrangement could work?”
Ah, the pornoverse… where anal sex is lubeless, women cannot wait to participate in FMF threesomes, and when men ejaculate ex vivo, their sperm travels a minimum of 60 feet, six inches. That is exactly where I would send a newbie for tips on an emotionally charged issue.
Porn has its place for people who are exploring new elements to their sexuality. In a one-on-one situation, it can start a conversation about new practices ("Hey, remember, in that video we watched last night, when...?") But entering into the swinging world takes a little more networking, a lot more discussion, and perhaps a few cautions.
Two elements make O’Neill’s response particularly offensive. First, she doesn’t seem to know much about swinging. No harm in that in and of itself… until she decided to write about it, in which case a reader has the right to expect a certain amount of expertise or wisdom. One doesn't have to always agree with sex columnists Dan Savage or Tristan Taormino to know they've done their homework, and trust that their their views come from a place of knowledge and experience.
Second, O’Neill apparently couldn’t be arsed to do a little research, which would have given her a chance to offer some more useful (and, to my mind, interesting – her response is pretty vanilla) information.
Such as?
How about looking up online swinger forums, and recommending some particularly useful-looking strands? This site certainly has a few, and there are others… Those that have chat rooms can also provide a place to ask questions, although one will have to filter out the anonymous jerks and drama kings and queens from the respondents. Give , Maura: I can’t due to site restrictions, but surely you could.
Maura does mention that there are “lots of magazines” which can help. A name or two, especially for people who need a welcoming hand, would have been useful. Swinger magazines vary greatly in quality. Lifestyle Magazine has a print edition and an online presence, while Swing Time is an online forum that doesn’t seem to have been updated in a while. Swinger publications tend to be enthusiastic, if a bit self-serving… the better ones offer regional resources and commentary – a fact that would have been very useful for the questioning couple to know.
Here’s another bit of advice: Some swinger event organizers host newbie parties, in which those who haven’t swung before – or who haven’t swung with a particular group – can come and, without pressure to play, get a sense of what the crowd and the venue are like. Often these parties are like a pre-dinner cocktail hour: They take place for an hour or two, and more experienced players hang out and serve as guides before the lights dim and the serious play begins.
These types of newbie events provide exploring couples a chance to speak with more experienced swingers about expectations, hazards, and experiences. Granted, one needs a club that has fostered a sense of community among its members… but these sorts of clubs are out there. (Club organizers: Giving select members willing to show up early and serve as guides a break on their entry fees goes a long way toward facilitating this.)
For an even lower-pressure atmosphere, look for clubs that are strictly “off premises” (no bedrooms available, which reduces the pressure to play immediately). Contact management, and ask about opportunities to interact – some off-premises events are really more nightclub/dance party happenings, which don’t facilitate conversation.
Maura’s final bit of advice has the feel of a columnist who needed one more sentence before wrapping up her deadline: “I think the fact that you are open to this idea means that you could meet just the right couple or person when you least expect it.”
Um, yeah. It could also mean that the exploring couple continues not to put themselves in the path of that right couple or person… or courts embarrassment (or worse) by engaging the wrong couple, or making an inappropriate (drunken?) proposal to a friend or co-worker.
Going to be a professional columnist? Bring something to the table beyond the superficial… especially when dealing with a loaded subject like sex or relationships. And, if nothing, else, don’t offer porn as a source for pointers in the real world.
(Final note... for us amateurs... what resources would you folks suggest to this new-to-it-all couple?)
|
|
|
17
Comments
|
|
Fun For All Ages! Swingers Club Part Of Multi-Function Property Sale
|
Posted:Aug 17, 2014 10:59 am
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2014 8:41 am
32569 Views
|
It’s not often one gets to incorporate Richard Nixon into a swingers blog post, but a recent property sale in Pennsylvania offers the opportunity… so why not?
Entrepreneur Kim Yates was the winning bidder for a 62.5-acre land parcel at Colonial Valley in Heidelberg Township, according to “Plans shaping up for new Haunted Mill,” an article published on the York Daily News’s site. The lot, which Yates bought for $525,000, includes what was formerly called the Haunted Mill Scream Park, as well as some rental properties, and is located near property that was once owned by President Nixon’s parents.
The purchase also includes the land on which The Farm Travel Club, a once-and-future on-premises swingers club (which closed in early July for renovations) sits. Yates doesn’t have a ownership position in the club itself, but she does own Kim’s Krypt – a scare-um attraction in Baltimore – and is apparently looking to expand her fright empire.
As for the club: Never went to The Farm myself, but from its reputation in various forums as of several years ago people seemed to enjoy it both as a club itself, and as a destination. Unlike many clubs, The Farm offered overnight accommodations. No clue as to whether the new club will continue to do so.
For now, Yates seems to be taking a live-and-let-live approach to the club. “I don’t really know much about the Farm Club,” Yates told Penn Live in an early July article titled “Fun and freaky auction: Historic farm in Spring Grove was home to adult club and haunted attraction.” “I’m not here to judge them and shut them down… if it makes me money to help me run my business, that’s great. But that’s not my main concern.”
That’s easy for Yates to say while the club is closed for remodeling. Fingers crossed that her good will stays in place once it reopens.
Oh, and an open invitation to Yates, who from all accounts – and based on how she comes across in interviews, and how exuberant she seems in accompanying news photographs – seems like a joyful, playful person: Ms. Yates, consider making a visit to the club when it reopens (under new management and the name The Korral, according to the York Daily News). The lifestyle always has room for one more person with a sense of fun!
Note: If the new club sucks, I’m going to be eating those words. To the new club owners: You’ve got a dynamic media presence serving as your landowner. While The Farm hasn’t been causing too much controversy in the community of late, it did go through a period of notoriety during the 1990s. Best behavior, ‘k?
|
|
|
7
Comments
|
|
Open Marriage Articles Show What Swingers Already Know: Single Men Are Low On the Totem Pole
|
Posted:Aug 13, 2014 10:18 pm
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2014 8:42 am
32711 Views
|
Ever want to take someone in the vanilla community under your wing and explain the graduate-level facts of life to him or her? That was my reaction when I read two articles discussing how a man’s successful attempt at coercing his girlfriend into an open relationship backfired on him.
I’ll talk about the articles themselves in a minute, but there’s both an obvious flaw and a subtle flaw in that last sentence. The obvious flaw is the word “coercing.” Whether an open marriage, swinging, or wanting to bring that life-sized Big Bird doll into your bed, sexual activity is something to be discussed and agreed upon.
The subtle flaw is in the gentleman’s thinking: In the non-monogamous sexual arena, women are, for lack of a better word, king. This is doubly so in the swinging community (and yes, swinging and non-monogamy are not synonyms).
There are folks who believe swinging is something only done by couples and between couples. There are couples who will include single people under that definition, usually because they’re angling for a threesome. And then there are singles… the highly desirable single females occasionally referred to as those rare and mythical beasts “unicorns”, and single men, who are about as rare as, oh, oxygen.
What any single male swinger could have told the would-be Lothario who pitched the open relationship was that single women in non-monogamous, sexually oriented situations are always going to have an easier time finding playmates. (Desirable playmates is another story.) Single men in the swinging lifestyle are not only low on the totem pole, they’re lucky if they have a space on that pole at all. More often, they’re grateful for a chance to dig the hole where the totem pole is going to be erected.
The original article, the one by the gent who pitched open marriages and which appeared on Reddit, has apparently been deleted. But the article has been discussed in other forums, at least one of which claims to quote the original in full (although, this being the internet, these sorts of pieces are open to, um, selective editing, if not fabrication out of whole cloth.)
Let’s give the commenters the benefit of the doubt, and assume that all quotes are accurate. What I could have done without is the condescending tone the two commenting articles took. One, which appeared on Deadspin in mid-May, was titled “Your Open Relationship Is Horseshit”, while the other, which showed up on Jezebel at the same time, was labeled “Dude’s Demand for an Open Relationship Backfires Spectacularly”.
Granted, it doesn’t sound as though the gentleman – and I use the term loosely – was especially deft in how he suggested/demanded/blackmailed his girlfriend into what he wanted. And yes, most swingers could have told him what the realized result was going to be (his girlfriend received a lot more propositions than he did).
But… just like swinging, just like asking a friend to share join you and the person you’re in a relationship with in bed, just like lugging that life-sized Big Bird doll into the bedroom, all of these situations can work if prefaced with open, honest, and safe communication.
All that said… to the Jezebel and Deadspin writers who used this one particularly clumsy effort to denigrate anything other than monogamy… spare me. There are a lot of loving couples who are making all sorts of configurations work within the context of their strong, healthy relationships. If you can’t handle these situations, don’t participate in ‘em. That’s your prerogative. But don’t dismiss those who can.
And, to administer a final blow to that deceased equine, a note for single men looking to engage in non-traditional sexual situations: Go into them knowing that the deck is significantly stacked against you, merely because of your genetic makeup. Sure, it’s not fair, but what of that? If you’re not an utter ass when this truth rears its head again and again, you’ll separate yourselves from those who are.
|
|
|
14
Comments
|
|
The Play's The Thing Wherein I'll Catch The Conscience Of The Swing(er)
|
Posted:Aug 9, 2014 8:16 am
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2014 8:42 am
33601 Views
|
The word “play” is probably my favorite euphemism for sexual activity, especially in a club or swinging situation. Asking a potential partner if he/she wants to play is a lot more gentle than the somewhat stilted “Ya wanna?” And it doesn’t have the buzz-killing potential of “Let’s fuck” (“Let’s fuck” can work depending on the level of tongue-in-cheek interaction people have had before the proposition is made, as well as whether it is delivered playfully. But it’s risky, folks… it’s risky.)
In a pinch, asking someone if he/she wants to “go upstairs” can work… but only if the club does, in fact, have an upstairs where the play areas are located. (Although there’s always the possibility of having a rooftop romp, I suppose. Just make sure someone props the access door open. Sad experience begs me to mention this.)
As far as euphemisms go, I’ll be sticking with “play” for the time being… and it looks as though National Public Radio agrees with me. In a recent article on NPR’s blog (“Play Doesn't End With Childhood: Why Adults Need Recess Too”) author Sami Yenigun places swinging as an adult activity right next to within-limits gambling, board games, and carnival midways.
(I love the idea of sex games being equated with board games. I’m a huge Scrabble fanatic, and consider a turn that builds words both vertically and horizontally almost as titillating as a gentle stroke or two. Hey, I said almost.)
In her post, Yenigun discusses the Power Exchange, a San Francisco-based sex club in which people are actively encouraged to explore their fantasies “in a safe, sex-positive environment.”
I’ve never been to the club, and I can’t speak to its claim that it’s “Accepting of more lifestyles than most of the 'other' sex clubs out there” – save to say that it’s nice to see someone is still keeping public relations writers employed. But the club is quite earnest in reinforcing this claim, with language on its online welcome page touting its fantasy rooms and dungeons.
The site is not without flaws: A little more detail about these rooms would have been appreciated, along with some photographs – which don’t even need to show people playing – that give a sense of the quality of its offerings. Can’t help but to raise an eyebrow at their absence, but I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt and hope that they’ll be posted at some point.
Back to play: Yenigun quotes Dr. Stuart Brown, head of a nonprofit called the National Institute for Play, as saying “The couples who sustain a sense of mutual playfulness with each other tend to work out the wrinkles in their relationships much better than those who are really serious.”
Granted, Brown probably wasn’t commenting on swinging, but there is a lot of truth to this statement within the lifestyle: Sex has a place as a wonderful, tender, intimate interaction between two monogamous adults who care for each other a great deal. But it also – for those who can handle it – has a place as a simple, joyful activity between people (number indeterminate) who enjoy each other on a less-committed level.
Here’s my question for Mike Powers, who founded and runs Power Exchange: Any thoughts on setting up a board game room for perverts like me who consider landing on Marvin Gardens a form of foreplay?
|
|
|
18
Comments
|
|
For Swingers, The Good Is Oft Interred With Their Bone(r)s
|
Posted:Aug 5, 2014 3:33 pm
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2014 8:43 am
32888 Views
|
NOTE: THIS POST DEALS WITH AN UGLY TOPIC -- ONE WHICH SITE GUIDELINES DO NOT ALLOW BEING REFERENCED BY A SPECIFIC TERM.
Homework assignment, folks: I want everyone who self-identifies as a swinger, or at least swing-curious, to stop reading and go rescue an infant from a burning building. In a pinch, donating an organ (one of the life-sustaining organs, if you please) to a needy stranger will do, as will taking a bullet for a clergy member. Any faith will do.
This is a two-part assignment. When the media interviews you about your selfless act, you must mention that you swing, or are at least inclined to investigate it. Because the community needs a responsible, if not heroic, activity to counterbalance an ugly series of reports involving an alleged sexual assault at a swingers’ club.
“Alleged” is important here: The trial, which is taking place in Sheffield, South Yorkshire, England, is ongoing. Nobody’s been found guilty as of August 5.
To state the obvious: This type of assault is an ugly, ugly action performed by vile individuals. It is also outside – well outside – the norm for swingers, where consensual play is a watchword and “No means no” is a mantra drummed into any participant. And a bare minimum requirement for swing clubs is that they have authority structures prepared to quickly and effectively step in and enforce that rule.
The media isn’t letting this case go for good reason: The story has an imagination-grabbing hook. In this case, it’s that the alleged event took place during a 2013 Halloween party, and the accused was dressed as Herman Munster.
The site for the United Kingdom’s newspaper The Daily Mirror has been following the case: There’s an introductory article under the headline “Man dressed as Herman Munster ***** woman at swingers club in room full of mirrors, court told.”
*Sigh* Look, I can’t fault the papers for observing that the alleged attack took place at a swing club. But earlier I wrote about a threesome on a boat in New York City in which the boat ended up violating a security perimeter around an airport. Were those three swingers? Or were they just people who decided to have a little ill-advised fun?
Regarding the Halloween case, if the accused, Jeremy Frazer Newsome Smith, is guilty, I hope he does some hard time. Herman Munster? in prison soon find out what real monsters are like, and it’s hard to have any sympathy.
There is always the chance – no matter how unlikely – that this was a consensual activity gone awry. Such instances are not unheard of. In court, Smith has acknowledged that there was sexual activity, but says that it was consensual, according to a report in The Star, a U.K. paper which published a piece titled “‘Frankenstein’ denies Sheffield sex club *****.”
In this instance, however, the claim doesn’t pass the smell test: False accusations usually have an element of revenge behind them, and the two don’t seem to have known each other long enough for this to be the case.
But… dammit, where the hell was security at La Chambre, the Attercliffe-based club where the incident took place? For that matter, where were the other patrons – because people at swing clubs really do have a responsibility to look out for one another – who should have stepped in?
The media isn’t going to let this story go, thanks to the Herman Munster angle. (Want to live forever in the press? Become a character. Infamy to follow.) In addition to being a horrific happenstance for the victim, it’s a black eye on the community.
It’s also unfair. I’ve met a lot of people in the lifestyle who are medical professionals or caregivers – doctors, EMT drivers, nursing aides, and so forth. Just once, I’d love to read a story headlined “Swinger Saves Astronaut With Emergency CPR While On Relief Mission,” or something similar. Is that too much to ask?
|
|
|
8
Comments
|
|
Oh, Canada! Outdoor QC Swingers’ Fest Has Town Leaders Scrambling For Cover
|
Posted:Aug 2, 2014 1:01 pm
Last Updated:Aug 23, 2015 12:27 am
36180 Views
|
Outdoor frolicking in the August sun? That’s what organizers at a nudist enclave near Sainte-Brigitte-des-Saults, a town about 75 miles east of Montreal (or 125 kilometers, for Canadian readers), have scheduled for early August. Town officials, who assumedly wear clothes, are suddenly finding their knickers in a twist.
I can’t link to the story itself, which ran in the Toronto Sun on July 30, but according to the piece (“Swingers festival rankles officials in Quebec town”) skyclad swingers are going to be making the beast with two backs in open air on the campgrounds, along trails, in campers, and pretty much everywhere except the restaurant, the bar, and the swimming pool.
First off: No swimming pool? If the nature trails are fair game, it stands to reason the pool and its environs should be an appropriate venue as well. But rules are rules, even if a splash or two of chlorinated water to the privates is preferable to potentially exposing ‘em to poison sumac.
All right, so the pools are off limits. But… nature trails? If the folks at the Adam & Eve nudist camp aren’t allowing non-swingers in at the same time, there shouldn’t be any limits. But if they are – which would be the only reason town officials should be upset – the image of non-swinging nature lovers suddenly stumbling over a sixsome in the middle of a rut will be one for the scrapbooks.
The event’s status is up in the air, as of August 2. Town Mayor Jean-Guy Hebert swore the city’s council would meet to see if the event could be regulated through bylaws.
That’ll be a tough call. The Supreme Court of Canada legalized swinging in 2005, with the provisions that activities take place between consenting adults – a rule one would find at any swing event, it should be noted – and beyond the gaze of those who would be disturbed by the activities, according to attorney Robert La Haye, who brought the 2005 case to Canada’s high court.
Here’s one of the more interesting aspects of this story: Tacked on to the bottom is an anonymous poll which asks “Would you go to a swingers camp?”
Now, internet polls should never, ever be taken as anything remotely scientific (blah blah, self-selected sample size, not necessarily a representative sample of the population, and other hand-wringing only a numbers nerd could love). But…
As of mid-day August 2, with more than 3,000 responses tallied, the breakout was:
48% -- I’d try it
18% -- Maybe
33% -- No way
(The numbers don’t total 100 percent due to rounding.)
Take a look at those numbers. A fairly hefty majority of the Toronto Sun’s audience – nearly six in ten -- would at least mull the idea. Given this majority, which ones are the perverts, and which ones represent the “norm”?
|
|
|
10
Comments
|
|
A Current Events Twist To The Swingers-On-A-Boat Cliché
|
Posted:Jul 30, 2014 1:58 pm
Last Updated:Jul 24, 2015 4:59 am
31322 Views
|
For those who keep up with current events, the last few months have been an especially tension-laden time. The good news is that every so often a story pops up amid the international strife and domestic turbulence reports that makes being a news junkie worthwhile.
On June 25, The Examiner offered the following teasing headline: “Swingers crash into La Guardia Airport as threesome goes wrong.” Yowza! My fair city has been pretty jumpy for the last, oh, 13 years or so. How did this story manage to – literally – fly under the radar?
Well, first off, it didn’t fly at all. What crashed was a boat, which was drifting, or puttering, or sailing, or whatever boats do (all right, so I’m a die-hard landlubber. Sue me.) But the mind still boggles at how a boat – a water-based conveyance, last time I checked – managed to crash into an airport, where water landings are, at best, an unwelcome happenstance.
Per The Examiner, the boat wasn’t properly secured, and ended up running into a stanchion when Craig Gallo, who was piloting it, decided to leave the wheel and join James Benenato and Mary Ann Belson for a little below-the-deck frolicking.
Nothing wrong with frolicking, in and of itself. But there is something wrong with a) not realizing where security parameters around airports are, and b) failing to secure one’s boat before leaving the controls. Sheesh, it’s things like that which give swingers a bad name!
But… were these three really swingers? Apparently Gallo, Benenato, and Belson had met each other at a bar earlier. So… a question, readers. Does a threesome, even a threesome with someone(s) you just met, make a swinger, as implied in the piece’s headline? To me, swinger is more a state of mind – it’s a conscious decision to ethically explore multiple partners.
Back to our boat: It was a damned good thing the three were only interested in keeping penetration activities within their small circle. As a Port Authority spokesperson noted, the fact that the boat had gotten as close as it did was definitely a breach of airport security. (Night patrols had been cut back as a cost-reducing measure.)
The spokesperson added that if the three had been terrorists, they would have been in prime position to shoot at planes, had they owned hand-held rockets.
Sounds as though the authorities are taking the incident – in which Belson suffered a broken nose and jaw, but the other two were apparently unhurt – in stride. As the spokesperson said, “There’s a moral here: If you’re feeling amorous aboard a boat, I suggest you drop your anchor before you drop your pants.”
Side note: what is it with swingers and boats? Browse enough swinger listings, and one sees a higher-than-expected incidence of “Come join us on our boat!” or some variation of that. These offers are supposedly from couples, but one never knows.
Not sure why the swinger community would cross over with the searfaring community. Is it because swingers are looking to showcase their wealth? Because a boat represents a certain amount of freedom and fun (and, um, all-exposure sunbathing?) Or – for those with a sinister turn of mind – because, when someone is out on a boat, it’s awfully hard to say “no” to something – especially when the alternative is having to swim several miles back to shore?
Whatever the reason, the concept of private boats has been warped for me. Can’t hear it without thinking about creative uses for tanning butter. Fifty years ago, comedian Lenny Bruce spoke about how innocent words can take on prurient connotations. As Bruce said:
Suppose it’s three o’clock in the morning: I’ve just done the last show, I meet a girl, and I like her…I can’t say to her, “Would you come to my hotel?”…[e]very healthy comedian has given motel such a dirty connotation that I couldn’t ask my grandmother to go to a motel, say I wanted to give her a Gutenberg Bible at three in the morning.
The next day at two in the afternoon, when the Kiwanis Club meets there, then hotel is clean. But at three o’clock in the morning… where the hell can you live that’s clean? You can’t say hotel to a chick, so you try to think, what won’t offend? What is a clean word to society? What is a clean word that won’t offend any chick?
Trailer. That’s it, trailer. “Will you come to my trailer?”
“All right, there’s nothing dirty about trailers. Trailers are hunting and fishing and Salem cigarettes. Yes, of course, I’ll come to your trailer. Where is it?”
“Inside my hotel room.”
So… 50 years later, here we are. Boats are for swingers. Just be sure to drop your anchor – preferably outside of security perimeters.
|
|
|
6
Comments
|
|
To link to this blog (humorlife) use [blog humorlife] in your messages.
|
|
|
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
1
|
21
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
71
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
