MMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmm
I know someone who might like that Wilma lol......
hehehehehehehehehehehehe
Promises promises!
Love
Fran & Stu
xxxxxxxxx
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Forum
Ohhhhh..just in case someone feels the need to correct me in any way, shape or form..I am jesting (though on the Salmon front I am 100% correct).
Mind you the last bit of wild salmon we had the cat got....walked all over the work surfaces for it too.
Besides I didn't like the way it looked at me..it eyes all locked and empty...maybe the cancerous, ( please feel free to correct my spellings...its 12:30 am) farmed is better....at least it smiles at you...knows revenge is imminent!!!
Beware the Salmon !!!
Stu of the "Fran & Stu " Variety
Mind you the last bit of wild salmon we had the cat got....walked all over the work surfaces for it too.
Besides I didn't like the way it looked at me..it eyes all locked and empty...maybe the cancerous, ( please feel free to correct my spellings...its 12:30 am) farmed is better....at least it smiles at you...knows revenge is imminent!!!
Beware the Salmon !!!
Stu of the "Fran & Stu " Variety
Just had a thought..no one has mentioned lady Penelope..classy lady there and you get to shag in a pink roller! Mind you I bet that Parker would be watching!
Or how about Penelope Pitstop...imagine as she nears orgasm..."Heelllp!! Heellpp Me!!!
So come on, which one of you would be her Dick Dastardly...or even Mutley!!!
He He
Fran
Or how about Penelope Pitstop...imagine as she nears orgasm..."Heelllp!! Heellpp Me!!!
So come on, which one of you would be her Dick Dastardly...or even Mutley!!!
He He
Fran
Fred
I told you I liked older men lol!! Yes I know he was only 27 when he died but hes really old now lol!!! and I love a man in leather trousers.... do you have a pair?????
Stu says tell Wilma he'd also do Betty Rubble, but he'd be thinking of Wilma!!!
Of course Wilma is his number one but he didn't want to be predictable
I told you I liked older men lol!! Yes I know he was only 27 when he died but hes really old now lol!!! and I love a man in leather trousers.... do you have a pair?????
Stu says tell Wilma he'd also do Betty Rubble, but he'd be thinking of Wilma!!!
Of course Wilma is his number one but he didn't want to be predictable
Sorry Cutechick, never said you did take risks personally, but you did say
Read that again and it so looks like that STI's are an acceptable risk in swinging. Well we can't agree with that. The thread is about cheating, we were talking of guys doing things behind their partner's backs. We swing, we know the risks and accept them, taking precautions to limit the chance of us or anyone we swing with to fall victim to a nasty STI. The unsuspecting wife/husband at home doesn't have that option to assess the risk to her/him and make an informed choice, the partner is putting her/him at risk without their consent.
As to the cat, in our scenario they didn't have one, so she became sterile due to her husband's philanderings...come on look at the real issues in this thread.
As to my misspelling well if that is your way of trying to score a point over me, thanks for the laugh. I have to say we come on here to discuss and debate, we don't look to denigrate anyone personally, each and all have an opinion and thank god we still have the right to voice them freely. So, I couldn't be arsed to go get the dictionary and check my spelling, you knew what I was talking about, why draw attention to it? No adult argument to contribute?
LOL, I am bored of this thread now, so won't contribute to it again, but I am sure some folk will and I just hope they don't have a typo, otherwise the thread is in danger of becoming an English lesson!
Fran & Stu
As for STD's, sure there is a risk, but there's also a risk in crossing the road or using public transport.
Read that again and it so looks like that STI's are an acceptable risk in swinging. Well we can't agree with that. The thread is about cheating, we were talking of guys doing things behind their partner's backs. We swing, we know the risks and accept them, taking precautions to limit the chance of us or anyone we swing with to fall victim to a nasty STI. The unsuspecting wife/husband at home doesn't have that option to assess the risk to her/him and make an informed choice, the partner is putting her/him at risk without their consent.
As to the cat, in our scenario they didn't have one, so she became sterile due to her husband's philanderings...come on look at the real issues in this thread.
As to my misspelling well if that is your way of trying to score a point over me, thanks for the laugh. I have to say we come on here to discuss and debate, we don't look to denigrate anyone personally, each and all have an opinion and thank god we still have the right to voice them freely. So, I couldn't be arsed to go get the dictionary and check my spelling, you knew what I was talking about, why draw attention to it? No adult argument to contribute?
LOL, I am bored of this thread now, so won't contribute to it again, but I am sure some folk will and I just hope they don't have a typo, otherwise the thread is in danger of becoming an English lesson!
Fran & Stu
Hi guys..wow just picked up this thread again and phew..torrento or what?
Ok, too many points to pick up, but for what its worth here's an opinion on a couple.
Redhot...actually yes i can tell you I have been certain, I have only swung with a few guys but I swung with them cos I trusted them through the relationship/info we developed. Ok I can't say that I am 100% sure that they weren't cheaters, my point, which is missed all along this thread is that I would not CHOOSE to swing with a married/attached guy where his partner wasn't fully supportive. I don't pretend that I could have been/could be duped, but I do my utmost to ensure that I don't provide any guy with our fun if I suspect at all that he is cheating.
cutechick actually scares me when she compares getting an STD with the inherent dangers of death all around us...yes we are all in the lottery of life and we may be killed tomorrow by an errant driver, but to say that catching an STD is an acceptable risk is mind boggling. She seems to like scenarios, so here's one for you...married guy goes dogging, wife thinks he is playing darts...no probs there...thread was about swings not dogs.... he catches clymidia..wife gets it too...no obvious symptoms..she wants baby..they try...can't get pregnant..have tests...clymidia...she doesn't know how she got it...the questions begin...guess the rest...or maybe you don't care?
Further to the above she says
Sorry dear but you are fundamentally wrong....where in nature do you find contraception? That's an invention of humankind to have sex for recreation. Get real as you might say..your arguments are flawed and very scary, lets hope the majority of swingers don't have your outlook, have you forgotten the dangers of Aids?
Fran & Stu
Ok, too many points to pick up, but for what its worth here's an opinion on a couple.
Redhot...actually yes i can tell you I have been certain, I have only swung with a few guys but I swung with them cos I trusted them through the relationship/info we developed. Ok I can't say that I am 100% sure that they weren't cheaters, my point, which is missed all along this thread is that I would not CHOOSE to swing with a married/attached guy where his partner wasn't fully supportive. I don't pretend that I could have been/could be duped, but I do my utmost to ensure that I don't provide any guy with our fun if I suspect at all that he is cheating.
cutechick actually scares me when she compares getting an STD with the inherent dangers of death all around us...yes we are all in the lottery of life and we may be killed tomorrow by an errant driver, but to say that catching an STD is an acceptable risk is mind boggling. She seems to like scenarios, so here's one for you...married guy goes dogging, wife thinks he is playing darts...no probs there...thread was about swings not dogs.... he catches clymidia..wife gets it too...no obvious symptoms..she wants baby..they try...can't get pregnant..have tests...clymidia...she doesn't know how she got it...the questions begin...guess the rest...or maybe you don't care?
Further to the above she says
It's as nature intended after all and not just for procreation y'know
Sorry dear but you are fundamentally wrong....where in nature do you find contraception? That's an invention of humankind to have sex for recreation. Get real as you might say..your arguments are flawed and very scary, lets hope the majority of swingers don't have your outlook, have you forgotten the dangers of Aids?
Fran & Stu
Fred,
Not at all, swinging is based on trust, honesty and integrity, how can those three principles be involved if you are cheating on someone? Swinging has no place for those seeking extra marital affairs. How can you trust someone who is cheating?
Who would wish to be responsible for the possible break up of a marriage?
What's more galling to us are the guys (sorry guys, but its always been you in our experience!) who get arsey when you decline them for that reason.
As to the professionals etc, there's bound to be some greedy person looking to make money out of it!
Stick to your moral high ground Fred, we are going to! :kiss: lol
Fran
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Am I just taking the moral high ground on this?
Not at all, swinging is based on trust, honesty and integrity, how can those three principles be involved if you are cheating on someone? Swinging has no place for those seeking extra marital affairs. How can you trust someone who is cheating?
Who would wish to be responsible for the possible break up of a marriage?
What's more galling to us are the guys (sorry guys, but its always been you in our experience!) who get arsey when you decline them for that reason.
As to the professionals etc, there's bound to be some greedy person looking to make money out of it!
Stick to your moral high ground Fred, we are going to! :kiss: lolFran
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Jags, Mark, thanks for your input, we agree that the topic should be locked, we merely looked for perspectives on it and maybe there will come a time and a system that will back up the work that the mods and ops are putting in already.
Sorry your baby won't sleep Mark, but have to say we know that one all too well
Lock and load Jags!!!!
Fran & Stu
Sorry your baby won't sleep Mark, but have to say we know that one all too well
Lock and load Jags!!!!
Fran & Stu
Cheers Jags...I doubt that we would experience such crap on here, this has proved so far to be an amazing community, all I can say about the other site was that I know of a number of members who frequent here who had similiar probs there...gotta feeling that site is really the gutter..but hey never mind, got here now..wayhey!!
Claire, know your frustrations, thats the reason we started this thread, to generate, we hoped, ideas to limit the bozo element and it has certainly generated discussion, which is fab. We weren't expecting to solve the probs of the
I feel that we have exhausted our input to this discussion, but hope that all of you with an opinion will post, maybe someone could post a new thread with a poll, it might gauge the level of interest in running a fledgling system, hell we would even volunteer to run the verification process (e mails etc or whatever system was felt best). Perhaps a three month trial say and re-evaluate, take a poll etc, ask the newbies their opinion etc???????
Right enough from us! Over to you.
Have a good one! (or two or three or four....or as many as you can take!!!!)
Stu of the "Fran and" variety
Claire, know your frustrations, thats the reason we started this thread, to generate, we hoped, ideas to limit the bozo element and it has certainly generated discussion, which is fab. We weren't expecting to solve the probs of the
time-wasters, men pretending to be women, men pretending to be couples etc etc, but thought that the verification idea had some mileage, even if only one person gained by meeting another genuine person(s) in whatever way then surely it could be called a success.
I feel that we have exhausted our input to this discussion, but hope that all of you with an opinion will post, maybe someone could post a new thread with a poll, it might gauge the level of interest in running a fledgling system, hell we would even volunteer to run the verification process (e mails etc or whatever system was felt best). Perhaps a three month trial say and re-evaluate, take a poll etc, ask the newbies their opinion etc???????
Right enough from us! Over to you.
Have a good one! (or two or three or four....or as many as you can take!!!!)
Stu of the "Fran and" variety
Sgt Bilko, you didn't enflame anything lol, just had conversations with people who have said they are giving up swinging because they have been messed about etc. Like Tobyjug, yourself and I have to add, the vast majority of people on this site, all we expect is a bit of honesty and integrity and I reckon the bulk of people using this site come with both, just a few "spoilers" that can unfortunately really ruin some peoples' experience.
Thats where we were coming from on the verification idea, not really anger enflamed more annoyance that a small majority can ruin things for some. Small example, we recently refused to swing with someone (via e mail exchanges), we got a torrent of abusive e mails, including one threatening to sort me out with a baseball bat! Scary stuff...almost put us off. I have to add that was on another site, not here.
Right, nuff said!!
Cheers guys
Stu of the "fran and" variety
Thats where we were coming from on the verification idea, not really anger enflamed more annoyance that a small majority can ruin things for some. Small example, we recently refused to swing with someone (via e mail exchanges), we got a torrent of abusive e mails, including one threatening to sort me out with a baseball bat! Scary stuff...almost put us off. I have to add that was on another site, not here.
Right, nuff said!!
Cheers guys
Stu of the "fran and" variety
PS to Sarge Bilko
If you have been one of the unfortunate people who have been stood up, had your time wasted, had people trying to take you for a mug and the like, then maybe they might feel.."fix this...it's broken!" Lol...sorry couldn't resist it!
Stu of the "Fran and" variety.
I believe "If it's not broken, don't fix it" and I think that applies here.
If you have been one of the unfortunate people who have been stood up, had your time wasted, had people trying to take you for a mug and the like, then maybe they might feel.."fix this...it's broken!" Lol...sorry couldn't resist it!
Stu of the "Fran and" variety.
Ok, this thread has totally gone beyond anything we had contemplated in terms of verification. God forbid we should ever see ratings on performance, personality or any such thing. We were merely thinking that we have met some great people from this site, we hope they feel the same about us. It would be nice if we could recognise their genuine interest in this scene and vice-versa. A marker, star, tick etc against a profile was about the level we were thinking of. LOL, didn't think we might get a mark out of 10, but then Fran does like her Schoolgirl Uniform, so who knows 
.
We just felt that having a system that would help put people at ease contacting others, (ok any system is open to and can be abused and we are not naive enough to think otherwise, but it isn't necessarily a pre condition) and would help all of us to feel comfortable in our exchanges, particularly newbies.
Verification wouldn't stop the unverified from being contacted and succeeding in having fun(have to say we had success despite not being verified on another site), it would merely be a voluntary action on the part of those who wished to indicate some level of trust etc.
Who Knows, who cares? Its just nice to "chew the fat" over an issue or two! Mark says on the front page about ideas/constuctive criticism to improve the site...we all have had our share of timewasters etc...just thought is there a way to develop the community further..hmmm..how about verification, whoops isn't this where we came in?
Stu of the "Fran and" variety
.We just felt that having a system that would help put people at ease contacting others, (ok any system is open to and can be abused and we are not naive enough to think otherwise, but it isn't necessarily a pre condition) and would help all of us to feel comfortable in our exchanges, particularly newbies.
Verification wouldn't stop the unverified from being contacted and succeeding in having fun(have to say we had success despite not being verified on another site), it would merely be a voluntary action on the part of those who wished to indicate some level of trust etc.
Who Knows, who cares? Its just nice to "chew the fat" over an issue or two! Mark says on the front page about ideas/constuctive criticism to improve the site...we all have had our share of timewasters etc...just thought is there a way to develop the community further..hmmm..how about verification, whoops isn't this where we came in?
Stu of the "Fran and" variety
blue, I know what you mean, but verification is just an added layer that helps the newbies and the occasional private meets have that little bit more confidence in the people who frequent the site. Verification needn't just comes from meets, it could come from things like attendance at parties/munches etc. It could come with involvement in the site through the forum and the like. Having a system won't prevent those who aren't verified from having success and it won't weed out all the timewasters, it just shows another face of the site and the people on it.
As to developing cliques, well that has been said of the Forum more than once, and as a group of people develop friendships such exchanges can appear to the outsider and newbies a little cliquey, however, one of the very reasons we are here is because we are looking for new friends and all are welcome. Thus, a seriously interested party soon learns that they are more than welcome and soon become part of the scene.
To condemn a system without giving it a go seems a little blinkered, what damage could it do to try? It may work (as it does on some sites), it may not on here, who knows, but if we create a stronger, open and confident community then that has to be for the good of all who visit the site.
Stu (of the "Fran and "variety
As to developing cliques, well that has been said of the Forum more than once, and as a group of people develop friendships such exchanges can appear to the outsider and newbies a little cliquey, however, one of the very reasons we are here is because we are looking for new friends and all are welcome. Thus, a seriously interested party soon learns that they are more than welcome and soon become part of the scene.
To condemn a system without giving it a go seems a little blinkered, what damage could it do to try? It may work (as it does on some sites), it may not on here, who knows, but if we create a stronger, open and confident community then that has to be for the good of all who visit the site.
Stu (of the "Fran and "variety
