Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
edinbughchris
Over 90 days ago
Straight Male, 62
Forum
Given the 'encouragement' for using condoms among so many sectors (including SH of course!) I am continually perturbed at the lack of discussion of differences. I don't mean colours, flavours or Mickey Mouse ears - fine if that's your thing, but there's other considerations that get insufficient press.
Some of the things that influence me in buying a pack of condoms:
Length: generally not specified. The horribly short ones that only come half way down the shaft offer little reassurance - how can you tell it's still on when you're inside?
Width: one of the most important distinctions, yet you have to read the small print usually to find it. Varies on average it seems from 50 to 60 mm. If you have one that is too tight it is not only more difficult to get on, less comfortable, reduces sensation etc but I also worry about them breaking more (take a balloon - when will it be more vulnerable to a fingernail or rubbing - when it's blown up and stretched tight or when it's not blown to its limit?) Bear in mind latex stretches though, non-latex usually doesn't.
Ease of opening. Some condoms seem to be wrapped in a way that you practically need a security code to get in. Not just the box (though the first thing I do is get them out of the impregnable cello-wrapped box!) Some of the actual condom wrapper are not the easiest to open. Some of the better designed packets have a serrated edge that allows easy tear of the foil. Some don't.
Ease of unrolling. Some are much easier than others. Some even have a patented 'spring' action to help them unroll.
Latex or non-latex? Some studies have shown that some persons who find latex condoms unacceptable may prefer polyurethane condoms because of increased sensitivity and a lower rate of local irritation. They tend to be more expensive but generally I think they're worthy it. Non-latex are also safe to use with oil if you're massaging each other or whatever.
Family Planning Clinics get a bad press (usually deservedly) but some are improving and offer a selection. There's several types made by Pasante at some clinics. One is a 'large' size that, once you get it out of the dreaded box, has an easy-open foil packaging. It's long and non-latex and unrolls better than some. It's 180 mm long, 55 mm wide and 65 microns thick.
A very new design is the 'Pasante Unique' (made from resin) that come in a credit-card sized packet that fits in any wallet. It contains 3 condoms that are easily extracted. The condoms are very different - non-latex but also the way they are applied. You can almost put one on in a single movement, just like pulling a balaclava on. The 'ring' part is halfway down and there's also a small tag, red on one side and green on the other and marked to tell you which side goes on your cock. They look a bit unusual so I'd probably not use them with a new partner (who I want to reassure after all) and there's also the fact that once you've used one there is a tell-tale space in the pack which might bother some people. It's also incredibly thin (15 microns compared to say the Durex Avanti at 50 microns or the average standard of 70 microns).
I'm not fond of buying from Durex as I don't like their trade practices, but the Avanti is quite a good product in my opinion.
Inspiral condoms are worthy of a mention (voted number 1 by Cosmopolitan magazine duh!) although they are comparatively expensive. You can get them from Boots. They are a posh condom, with an easy-unroll action and also shaped to feel kinda nice too.
Japanese condoms are a nice treat if you are in a condom shop (make sure you get the export variety). Japan has more experience of making condoms than most countries and does a pretty good job.
Some of the things that influence me in buying a pack of condoms:
Length: generally not specified. The horribly short ones that only come half way down the shaft offer little reassurance - how can you tell it's still on when you're inside?
Width: one of the most important distinctions, yet you have to read the small print usually to find it. Varies on average it seems from 50 to 60 mm. If you have one that is too tight it is not only more difficult to get on, less comfortable, reduces sensation etc but I also worry about them breaking more (take a balloon - when will it be more vulnerable to a fingernail or rubbing - when it's blown up and stretched tight or when it's not blown to its limit?) Bear in mind latex stretches though, non-latex usually doesn't.
Ease of opening. Some condoms seem to be wrapped in a way that you practically need a security code to get in. Not just the box (though the first thing I do is get them out of the impregnable cello-wrapped box!) Some of the actual condom wrapper are not the easiest to open. Some of the better designed packets have a serrated edge that allows easy tear of the foil. Some don't.
Ease of unrolling. Some are much easier than others. Some even have a patented 'spring' action to help them unroll.
Latex or non-latex? Some studies have shown that some persons who find latex condoms unacceptable may prefer polyurethane condoms because of increased sensitivity and a lower rate of local irritation. They tend to be more expensive but generally I think they're worthy it. Non-latex are also safe to use with oil if you're massaging each other or whatever.
Family Planning Clinics get a bad press (usually deservedly) but some are improving and offer a selection. There's several types made by Pasante at some clinics. One is a 'large' size that, once you get it out of the dreaded box, has an easy-open foil packaging. It's long and non-latex and unrolls better than some. It's 180 mm long, 55 mm wide and 65 microns thick.
A very new design is the 'Pasante Unique' (made from resin) that come in a credit-card sized packet that fits in any wallet. It contains 3 condoms that are easily extracted. The condoms are very different - non-latex but also the way they are applied. You can almost put one on in a single movement, just like pulling a balaclava on. The 'ring' part is halfway down and there's also a small tag, red on one side and green on the other and marked to tell you which side goes on your cock. They look a bit unusual so I'd probably not use them with a new partner (who I want to reassure after all) and there's also the fact that once you've used one there is a tell-tale space in the pack which might bother some people. It's also incredibly thin (15 microns compared to say the Durex Avanti at 50 microns or the average standard of 70 microns).
I'm not fond of buying from Durex as I don't like their trade practices, but the Avanti is quite a good product in my opinion.
Inspiral condoms are worthy of a mention (voted number 1 by Cosmopolitan magazine duh!) although they are comparatively expensive. You can get them from Boots. They are a posh condom, with an easy-unroll action and also shaped to feel kinda nice too.
Japanese condoms are a nice treat if you are in a condom shop (make sure you get the export variety). Japan has more experience of making condoms than most countries and does a pretty good job.
Quote by bluexxx
OK... I am taking bookings for shags....... Sign below if you are interested.....
:small-print:
I will be choosing my shags according to the following criteria:
*** People who live in the North West, and who can drive (as I don't)
I live in the best city in the NW which is Edinburgh (which is in that part of the NW called "Scotland" lol)
*** People I know already.... can't be doing with newbies, sorry
You know me to say hi to (from JudyTV's Manchester social)
*** People who enjoy and have experience with group fun - much of my swinging is done in clubs - not really into straight 121s all that much really tbh so you must be comfortable with clubs and / or group sex
Totally. A lot more fun. Groups at eg Cupids, Xtasia (never enough room for more than five in there unless you use the sofas - my mate got his foot stuck in the radiator)
*** Bi guys - but nothing against straight guys really, provided they come equipped with their own female (that is, be bi if you're a single guy, but I don't care about your sexuality if you are a couple.... unless you are female, then I guess it would help if you're bi). TV / TS - always a pleasure :lol:
I cum as both. Orally-bi, especially for groups. When I'm part of a couple, well Sandie's very bi, Kathryn's not.
*** People who have flexible working hours... I have limited time in the evenings, but can do some daytimes - it always helps if you have the same availability as me
Prefer daytimes
Other than that, you've got to be in it to win it, so reply below...........
I can do lovely big coloured letters like JudyTV, which probably doesn't count for extra points, but hey, it looks nice ;-) ;-) ;-)
:smile2: :smile2: :smile2:
Oh yeah... me: 33, bi, female, and open to offers on where we meet, look at the links below for pics and more info....
:thumbup:
Quote by sexyscotcarol
Swinging has brought us closer together.
It has spiced up our sex life and encouraged us to experiment and we are having a ball doing it
That's more of the type of experience I can empathise with :-)
There's been a few comments about single guys in clubs, and one or two reactions from guys, but how about guys who are in a relationship with a swinger or swinging partner?
When I look through some relationships (one-to-one) with wonderful women that I have been privileged to know, women with swinging experience seem to be quite remarkable. I don't mean for a minute that every woman, or every person, isn't very special, but I think there's certain things that a more evolved person - especially those that learn from feedback - can learn from swinging (and which the unevolved simply ignore!)
i) you become better at handling jealousy - you learn to appreciate your own space; how that is different from your partner's, how to love yourself more and give and receive love better.
ii) you can become better at certain sexual basics . . . to an evolved person this can simply equate to having had a number of good partners - just that the honesty that goes with swinging maybe affords an opportunity to learn faster. E.g. I have yet to meet a swinger who was clumsy - in the way of climbing over me in bed and resting their elbow/knee with all their weight on me, or other basic inconsiderate things (you can go through several long term partners before finding one that can tactfully put you right). I've yet to come across a woman in swingers clubs that couldn't give a good blow-job (there's many outside of swinging that are proficient of course, but with someone watching you, who doesn't polish up their act, simply out of self respect? - plus you get the chance to learn from others - this is also an opportunity for guys). And I suspect that swingers tend to get better at communicating things they like and don't like more effectively (and politely) - almost as a rule of survival.
iii) I've yet to meet a swinger, especially a clubbing swinger, who wasn't meticulous about personal hygeine. The little things that are too often tactfully overlooked by someone who loves you, whereas you want to be at your best for strangers with whom you are going to be intimate . . . and then it becomes second nature to do it with one you love. Examples - buttholes you could eat your dinner off, fresh breath, scrubbed armpits, (and for guys, all these and) removing stubble. (guys - do you all shave before going to bed with your partner?? Do you wash your armpits before she nuzzles up under one?)
iv) treating sex as seriously as you would any hobby and trying to get better (but not neurotic) about it. Swinging is a hobby (and for many a lifestyle choice) - who wants to be cr*p at it!? yet in a simple one-to-one an inexperienced person (of either sex) can too easily think that's 'it's what's inside that counts' - sure it does - but how you express that outwardly is important too! I think I tend to the view that good sex requires a combination of feeling/passion/emotion AND technical knowledge/experience.
OK, these are just a few thoughts to hopefully maybe even up the balance. I'm very lucky inasmuch I've had almost exclusively good experiences from swinging. It's sad that some of the comments show there are some pretty inconsiderate 'swingers' about and it's not the first time I've heard of negative things. They bring the whole scene down. I like swinging mostly as I feel it offers the possibility of a better way of interacting than traditional relationships, at least for those that like it. (Though I would say that when I've had an even slightly less than brilliant experience, I've tended to say things to myself like, how could I have been more successfully picky? how could I have avoided that? how could I have attracted a better quality experience?)
Some of the comments remind me there's still much to do, still a long way to go. Maybe the example of tolerance, understanding and basic kindness/affection (which a lot of SH-ers show) helps. I've learnt a lot, and a lot about myself, from swinging, I've learnt a lot of good things, that have helped me grow as a person. I know this is a bit waffley for some tastes, but if I didn't feel there were benefits to swinging I wouldn't do it.
Love n hugs
Chris x x
:happy: :rose:
As far as i recall there's a tiny 'bi' corner in X-tasia but you could easily miss it. The place is enormous. As everyone else has said, there seems to be a sort of unspoken on male-on-male action in all clubs except on specific nights.
One other comment - if Xtasia is your first venture into clubland - it has a very different style to other clubs.
One other comment - if Xtasia is your first venture into clubland - it has a very different style to other clubs.
Hmmmm . . . think I could have phrased the question better . . . I'm thinking if your partner (eg long term partner) is also a swinger, or you swing together . . . Does being a swinger make your partner (or prospective partner) a better lover?
A 'one off' with another person in a swinging situation is not quite the same . . .
A 'one off' with another person in a swinging situation is not quite the same . . .
Quote by cc_7up
I think the best thing you can do is go to the clubs and parties section and have a read thro other peoples comments of verious clubs,
How come the comments are quite old? How often are they updated?
cc_7up
AFAIK they stopped updating them and hoped there was going to be a dedicated thread. The peeps running the site are human too and have jobs. Maybe us posters could organsie it, or someone start a related usenet group even?
Quote by bigslut
do not think high membership fees mean good clubs ''they'd just mean high fees''
any well-established club will allow you to look round first
if you are trying to assess the club always stay to the end of the evening lot of clubs don't get going to the end
and if you go on a quiet night ''try again'' because it's difficult to get a true valuation in one visit
and last but not least try not to have any preset ideas about what going to happen take it as it comes..... no joke intended..
Excellent advice from BigSlut there - I've only had good experiences, but I remember a friend being almost put off the clubbing scene cos when they got there (think it was in the North West somewhere) it was a dirty run down pub with a few mattresses thrown on the floor - eugh!
Most places have spent on bomb on making it lovely but you can't beat having a look around (or, if you're travelling, checking the pictures on the website at least).
I'm sure the best advice has already been given by lots of more experienced clubbers on this and other threads, but in case a few more words of encouragement can help -
The biggest hurdle I think is maybe going in the front door. Once you're there, you can find a place (the bar, lounge, wherever) to chill out and get a few breaths. When you're ready, catch someone's eye and strike up conversation the same as you would anywhere else (or in SH). Several clubs (like Partners) have got 'guides' on their websites which include plenty of helpful advice (eg 'Use being new to your advantage - say to someone you're new and what do they think of the club or ask them to show you round'). I always like phoning a new club and chatting to the staff for a few minutes before going the first time too. If you've done the in-depth conversation with each other about what your limits are, just keep each other up to date - remember it's your shared experience that counts, same as if you were going for a night out anywhere else (ie don't go surprising each other unless you're very sure). If you've got special limits or preferences in mind and you go off for a private session you might want to mention these to your new-found friends beforehand. Have a great time - and if you don't do anything on your first visit except chat at the bar or strip off in the jacuzzi there's no big deal. Clubs vary a lot and so do experiences, but mostly they're pretty nice places.
The general expectation of group activity I think, at least in clubs, is that it is purely physical - ie unequivocally casual, without strings or phone numbers. Gentle, respectful, tender, whatever is unanimously enjoyed - but afterwards you generally go back to simple politeness with new friends quite quickly and without showing undue lingering interest. (A great time for sweet nothings and can't-wait-to-be-alone-with-yous with your main partner.)
xx Chris
ps We're going to Partners (or poss Cupids) Fri/Sat 22nd/23rd July so you're welcome to say hi to us if you want to (this is a social invite - no implications - and same invite to anyone other SH'ers who's around greater Manchester and clubbing that weekend). A few of us were going to make it an intro weekend for new clubbers but the main interest has been from people who already go clubbing anyway!
The biggest hurdle I think is maybe going in the front door. Once you're there, you can find a place (the bar, lounge, wherever) to chill out and get a few breaths. When you're ready, catch someone's eye and strike up conversation the same as you would anywhere else (or in SH). Several clubs (like Partners) have got 'guides' on their websites which include plenty of helpful advice (eg 'Use being new to your advantage - say to someone you're new and what do they think of the club or ask them to show you round'). I always like phoning a new club and chatting to the staff for a few minutes before going the first time too. If you've done the in-depth conversation with each other about what your limits are, just keep each other up to date - remember it's your shared experience that counts, same as if you were going for a night out anywhere else (ie don't go surprising each other unless you're very sure). If you've got special limits or preferences in mind and you go off for a private session you might want to mention these to your new-found friends beforehand. Have a great time - and if you don't do anything on your first visit except chat at the bar or strip off in the jacuzzi there's no big deal. Clubs vary a lot and so do experiences, but mostly they're pretty nice places.
The general expectation of group activity I think, at least in clubs, is that it is purely physical - ie unequivocally casual, without strings or phone numbers. Gentle, respectful, tender, whatever is unanimously enjoyed - but afterwards you generally go back to simple politeness with new friends quite quickly and without showing undue lingering interest. (A great time for sweet nothings and can't-wait-to-be-alone-with-yous with your main partner.)
xx Chris
ps We're going to Partners (or poss Cupids) Fri/Sat 22nd/23rd July so you're welcome to say hi to us if you want to (this is a social invite - no implications - and same invite to anyone other SH'ers who's around greater Manchester and clubbing that weekend). A few of us were going to make it an intro weekend for new clubbers but the main interest has been from people who already go clubbing anyway!
I might be wrong, but I am guessing that the thread is about bottoms.
Maybe it’s not about bottoms, but I’m going to talk about them anyway.
It’s a bit narrow minded to think such things are always a pain in the ass, even if they’re not your cup of tea, and in this modern age of equality, we have to recognise that some of us are not only interested in each other’s bottoms but enjoy returning the favour (or having it returned, so to speak) and is hardly something to get too precious about. (end disclaimer for anyone of a sensitive nature)
Just as there are rules of encounter for the most basic ‘missionary’ sexual activity to avoid any minor unpleasantness (physical or emotional) so with less well-trodden roads a little foresight goes a long way to making it an enduringly pleasant experience for all concerned.
Firstly, however inelegant, discussing such excitements means discussing digestion and discomfort. If this is too sensitive then one needs a way to draw some lines in the sand beforehand. One lady of my acquaintance, when a partner expresses an interest in having his 'b' entry join in the fun of things, says quite loudly, “only if it’s nice and clean!†When she examines him, she tells me she will pack him off to the shower if it’s not up to her high standards.
The matter of lubricants has been discussed on another thread, but diet is something to be considered by everyone who ever allows exploration in the bottom zone. Fibre – plenty of it, is the first rule. Secondly, avoid foods that cause strong odour, and if in doubt stick to good salads that day. (I know several people who are also very fond of those little glycerine suppositories you can buy over the counter that produce a good 'clean out' in minutes.) Finally the gentleman who is welcoming such attentions might consider waxing (or using hair-remover cream) for that area, as well as keeping a supply of wet-wipe tissues in the bathroom next to the loo for last minute adjustments.
Apologies if this is way off topic or has been covered elsewhere, and apologies if it sounds like teaching you to suck eggs when you probably are far more knowledgeable than I am
Maybe it’s not about bottoms, but I’m going to talk about them anyway.
It’s a bit narrow minded to think such things are always a pain in the ass, even if they’re not your cup of tea, and in this modern age of equality, we have to recognise that some of us are not only interested in each other’s bottoms but enjoy returning the favour (or having it returned, so to speak) and is hardly something to get too precious about. (end disclaimer for anyone of a sensitive nature)
Just as there are rules of encounter for the most basic ‘missionary’ sexual activity to avoid any minor unpleasantness (physical or emotional) so with less well-trodden roads a little foresight goes a long way to making it an enduringly pleasant experience for all concerned.
Firstly, however inelegant, discussing such excitements means discussing digestion and discomfort. If this is too sensitive then one needs a way to draw some lines in the sand beforehand. One lady of my acquaintance, when a partner expresses an interest in having his 'b' entry join in the fun of things, says quite loudly, “only if it’s nice and clean!†When she examines him, she tells me she will pack him off to the shower if it’s not up to her high standards.
The matter of lubricants has been discussed on another thread, but diet is something to be considered by everyone who ever allows exploration in the bottom zone. Fibre – plenty of it, is the first rule. Secondly, avoid foods that cause strong odour, and if in doubt stick to good salads that day. (I know several people who are also very fond of those little glycerine suppositories you can buy over the counter that produce a good 'clean out' in minutes.) Finally the gentleman who is welcoming such attentions might consider waxing (or using hair-remover cream) for that area, as well as keeping a supply of wet-wipe tissues in the bathroom next to the loo for last minute adjustments.
Apologies if this is way off topic or has been covered elsewhere, and apologies if it sounds like teaching you to suck eggs when you probably are far more knowledgeable than I am
On an entirely different note, are you aware of seeing people differently in terms of 'partner potential' or simply G-I-B potential?
Fab article in the Economist of all places today - am quoting it below as I think peeps may find it interesting!
x x Chris
p.s. Any 5'1" lass like me to put my arm round her so her nostrils are on a level with my freshly scrubbed and exercised pits?
Odour and mating preferences
WHAT'S a girl to do when faced with the choice between a powerful action man who has great DNA but is likely to love her and leave her, and a carpet-and-slippers kind of bloke who will hang around and bring up the kids but may not be Mr Right in the genes department? Well, ideally, she should fool the latter into bringing up the former's children. And a piece of evidence that this is exactly what happens emerged this week from a research group led by Jan Havlicek of Charles University, in Prague.
Dr Havlicek and his colleagues were interested in discovering whether women are attracted by the smell of dominant men. A preference for the scent of dominants has been found in the females of other species, and scent is known to be important in attraction between the human sexes in other contexts, such as avoiding inbreeding. The attractiveness of body odour is also correlated with the attractiveness of the body it came from, even when presented separately from that body. But whether the odour of power—or, at least, of powerfulness—is attractive to women had not been established.
Deciding who is and is not a dominant male is the first question, of course. To do this, the researchers turned to one of the world's most widely used experimental animals, the hard-up male student. Their subjects were asked to rate such things as their tendency to correct others, to want to control conversations, and to surpass others' accomplishments, in a questionnaire designed to assess their dominance. In their paper in Biology Letters the researchers laconically observe that dominance in this questionnaire “corresponds to the scale ‘Narcissism’ in the widely used California psychological inventoryâ€.
After baring their all in this manner, the volunteers had to wear cotton pads under their armpits for 24 hours to collect the sweat therefrom, and also had to lay off curries, beer, cigarettes and similar delights of student life that might affect the smell of their sweat. Surprisingly, given these constraints, the researchers managed to persuade 48 men to volunteer.
Compared with this, the female volunteers had it easy. They had to smell the pads and rate them for “intensityâ€, “sexiness†and “masculinityâ€. Okay, perhaps not that easy. They also had to vouchsafe whether they were single or in an on-going relationship with a man, and to submit to a saliva test that would show the phase of their menstrual cycle.
The upshot of the trial was that women did, indeed, find the odour of dominants sexier than that of wimps—but only in special circumstances. These circumstances were first that the woman was already in a relationship and second that she was in the most fertile phase of her cycle. In other words, dominant males' scent was only more attractive at the point where a woman could both conceive and cuckold her mate. Which, given previous studies that show dominant men are indeed more likely than others to leave a woman holding the baby, makes perfect sense.
Fab article in the Economist of all places today - am quoting it below as I think peeps may find it interesting!
x x Chris
p.s. Any 5'1" lass like me to put my arm round her so her nostrils are on a level with my freshly scrubbed and exercised pits?
Odour and mating preferences
WHAT'S a girl to do when faced with the choice between a powerful action man who has great DNA but is likely to love her and leave her, and a carpet-and-slippers kind of bloke who will hang around and bring up the kids but may not be Mr Right in the genes department? Well, ideally, she should fool the latter into bringing up the former's children. And a piece of evidence that this is exactly what happens emerged this week from a research group led by Jan Havlicek of Charles University, in Prague.
Dr Havlicek and his colleagues were interested in discovering whether women are attracted by the smell of dominant men. A preference for the scent of dominants has been found in the females of other species, and scent is known to be important in attraction between the human sexes in other contexts, such as avoiding inbreeding. The attractiveness of body odour is also correlated with the attractiveness of the body it came from, even when presented separately from that body. But whether the odour of power—or, at least, of powerfulness—is attractive to women had not been established.
Deciding who is and is not a dominant male is the first question, of course. To do this, the researchers turned to one of the world's most widely used experimental animals, the hard-up male student. Their subjects were asked to rate such things as their tendency to correct others, to want to control conversations, and to surpass others' accomplishments, in a questionnaire designed to assess their dominance. In their paper in Biology Letters the researchers laconically observe that dominance in this questionnaire “corresponds to the scale ‘Narcissism’ in the widely used California psychological inventoryâ€.
After baring their all in this manner, the volunteers had to wear cotton pads under their armpits for 24 hours to collect the sweat therefrom, and also had to lay off curries, beer, cigarettes and similar delights of student life that might affect the smell of their sweat. Surprisingly, given these constraints, the researchers managed to persuade 48 men to volunteer.
Compared with this, the female volunteers had it easy. They had to smell the pads and rate them for “intensityâ€, “sexiness†and “masculinityâ€. Okay, perhaps not that easy. They also had to vouchsafe whether they were single or in an on-going relationship with a man, and to submit to a saliva test that would show the phase of their menstrual cycle.
The upshot of the trial was that women did, indeed, find the odour of dominants sexier than that of wimps—but only in special circumstances. These circumstances were first that the woman was already in a relationship and second that she was in the most fertile phase of her cycle. In other words, dominant males' scent was only more attractive at the point where a woman could both conceive and cuckold her mate. Which, given previous studies that show dominant men are indeed more likely than others to leave a woman holding the baby, makes perfect sense.
Firstly, thank you to all the Londoners who have posted - at least we know you are
ok.
My attempts to phone a close (non-Forum) friend yesterday were futile - the
networks were clogged. Then she phoned me back - to say she and her partner
had just had a baby . . .
(words fail me!!!) :-))))))
But then for all my friends who are ok, there are many, many people in
London who have been killed horribly, or maimed, or suffered the loss of a
love one. My heart goes out to them. If there is anyone on the Forum who has
suffered the loss of someone in these explosions, and needs a listening ear (even if it's
months from now), please feel free to phone me.
I saw a beautiful (Muslim, as it happened) quote this evening that moved me
with a quiet joy. I'd like to share it:
(from a cemetery near Srebrenica, scene of mass killings, in the Balkans)
"May revenge be turned to justice, may mothers' tears be turned into prayers
that there may be no more Srebrenicas."
There is a quiet calm of acceptance, I think, one where you still take
sensible measures/precautions, but one which only really comes to you with
the perception that at some point there may be nothing you can do. One day
you will die. One day you may be hit by a bolt of lightning. There is not
always someone to blame . . .
Sometimes there *is* someone to blame, but blame, anger, outrage, desire for
revenge, are all closely linked I feel. They are part of the psychological
process that goes with loss of some kind. People that are able to step back
and deal with their own trauma first, before taking action (or giving too much public vent to strong feelings such as those) are often not only the people who take the more sensible action eventually but much greater people for coming to an acceptance of themselves (and maybe of their own immortality or relative 'helplessness').
Strong emotions cloud judgement. We saw that with 9/11, inasmuch the main
response had little to do with either with catching the perpetrators or
making America / the world a safer place.
Yet in some ways I feel so much closer to Americans who had to suffer the
horrors of 9/11. Even if we weren't personally affected by the London
bombings or the (unimaginably greater scale) of 9/11, there is a sense of
loss, a sense of invasion of one's home, one's being, one's sanctity of the
ability to live one's life in peace.
The challenge I think is to treat it as a learning opportunity. Firstly, how
do we deal with it psychologically, on an individual level. That is very
challenging. It is quite possible that there *is* no sure way of 'defeating'
terrorists. Perhaps they are a fact of life. If we come to that conclusion,
then it is the *second* step to say, what are prudent measures, solidly
linked to firm logic, that can be taken, to minimize future suffering?
It is too soon to see if our government will take a lead in such a direction
(and without being overshadowed by the considerably less effectiveness of
U.S./populist knee-jerk reaction). I am not going to judge Blair, the Police
(or the Queen) for coming out with platitudes. The immediate need is to show
the people affected that you care / they care / *someone* cares. I don't
judge people who make jokes about it - doctors/surgeons use humour all the
time to cope with loss and dying and in an acceptable, sensible way (it was
well documented in the BMJ); there again, they don't do so in the hearing of
patients!
I'm going to break off this post now - I've just got an incoming email from
another Londoner I was worried about and want to go, 'thank goodness they're
ok' . . .
ok.
My attempts to phone a close (non-Forum) friend yesterday were futile - the
networks were clogged. Then she phoned me back - to say she and her partner
had just had a baby . . .
(words fail me!!!) :-))))))
But then for all my friends who are ok, there are many, many people in
London who have been killed horribly, or maimed, or suffered the loss of a
love one. My heart goes out to them. If there is anyone on the Forum who has
suffered the loss of someone in these explosions, and needs a listening ear (even if it's
months from now), please feel free to phone me.
I saw a beautiful (Muslim, as it happened) quote this evening that moved me
with a quiet joy. I'd like to share it:
(from a cemetery near Srebrenica, scene of mass killings, in the Balkans)
"May revenge be turned to justice, may mothers' tears be turned into prayers
that there may be no more Srebrenicas."
There is a quiet calm of acceptance, I think, one where you still take
sensible measures/precautions, but one which only really comes to you with
the perception that at some point there may be nothing you can do. One day
you will die. One day you may be hit by a bolt of lightning. There is not
always someone to blame . . .
Sometimes there *is* someone to blame, but blame, anger, outrage, desire for
revenge, are all closely linked I feel. They are part of the psychological
process that goes with loss of some kind. People that are able to step back
and deal with their own trauma first, before taking action (or giving too much public vent to strong feelings such as those) are often not only the people who take the more sensible action eventually but much greater people for coming to an acceptance of themselves (and maybe of their own immortality or relative 'helplessness').
Strong emotions cloud judgement. We saw that with 9/11, inasmuch the main
response had little to do with either with catching the perpetrators or
making America / the world a safer place.
Yet in some ways I feel so much closer to Americans who had to suffer the
horrors of 9/11. Even if we weren't personally affected by the London
bombings or the (unimaginably greater scale) of 9/11, there is a sense of
loss, a sense of invasion of one's home, one's being, one's sanctity of the
ability to live one's life in peace.
The challenge I think is to treat it as a learning opportunity. Firstly, how
do we deal with it psychologically, on an individual level. That is very
challenging. It is quite possible that there *is* no sure way of 'defeating'
terrorists. Perhaps they are a fact of life. If we come to that conclusion,
then it is the *second* step to say, what are prudent measures, solidly
linked to firm logic, that can be taken, to minimize future suffering?
It is too soon to see if our government will take a lead in such a direction
(and without being overshadowed by the considerably less effectiveness of
U.S./populist knee-jerk reaction). I am not going to judge Blair, the Police
(or the Queen) for coming out with platitudes. The immediate need is to show
the people affected that you care / they care / *someone* cares. I don't
judge people who make jokes about it - doctors/surgeons use humour all the
time to cope with loss and dying and in an acceptable, sensible way (it was
well documented in the BMJ); there again, they don't do so in the hearing of
patients!
I'm going to break off this post now - I've just got an incoming email from
another Londoner I was worried about and want to go, 'thank goodness they're
ok' . . .
I think it's kinda nice to get the names list one way or another for lots of reasons. Real names are nice if peeps want to give them, but SH names are cool too - easy to remember and there's the option of looking thru a person's past posts to 'get to know them a bit' before meeting which is really nice.
x :happy:
x :happy:
Quote by jack_daniels72
I think its probably best not to publicly post an attendees list - simply to ensure that nobody's name is used by anyone not invited to the munch. A list could be PM'd to those attending upon request.
Good idea, JD. I don't know if a list has ever been abused but it seems a nice enough courtesy to anyone feeling sensitive about the possibility - having available as a PM is helpful too though (if not too much admin for Lucy) - I am so poor at remembering names, so if I skim through the names of peeps going a few times beforehand it gets my brain a bit more in sync when I'm introduced.
Sorry if this is in the Meet Up section - my iPod has died and I need help!
Have done all the usual checks/re-installs - need to attach it to another computer running iTunes to see if it recognises it in order to determine if it's a fault on the iPod. If you have an iPod / run iTunes on a PC (with a USB slot) and live in or near Edinburgh would appreciate the favour!
xx
Have done all the usual checks/re-installs - need to attach it to another computer running iTunes to see if it recognises it in order to determine if it's a fault on the iPod. If you have an iPod / run iTunes on a PC (with a USB slot) and live in or near Edinburgh would appreciate the favour!
xx
Quote by equi-princess
What is the very first thing that attracts you to someone?????
The little detail that makes you want to know them further..........
It's the first thing I look for when I meet someone new. I usually try to find it before we speak. I look for something that says something about them (like their taste in clothes or their body language) but often it is their eyes or the way they smile.
xxx
I came across an entertaining and decidely well-written book this week called Nerve's Guide to Sex Etiquette for ladies and gentlemen. It's a superb guide for someone just starting to explore their sexual horizons but also has enough info and wit to entertain the experienced.
Big section on swinging, orgies etc as well.
x Chris
ps I found it in a sophisticated bookshop but you can also get it on Amazon from just a few quid.
Big section on swinging, orgies etc as well.
x Chris
ps I found it in a sophisticated bookshop but you can also get it on Amazon from just a few quid.
I think a useful term maybe is 'casual intimacy'. The etiquette of swinging generally involves very low level emotional stuff - most emotional stuff should just be platonic. But there are people who like to fluff it up a bit, and it makes for more intense sexual experience very often. But it's like handling nuclear power rods and all persons must be very clear about the rules and what's going on for peeps not to get hurt.
This doesn't just go for swinging, it goes for various casual relationships, one night stands, 'fuck-buddy' relationships, on-off relationships, or shagging an ex. The challenge is to be open and upfront before you dip your emotional privates in their personal space to make sure it is consensual. If in doubt, don't.
Having said that it's easy to talk in absolutes when none of us, even with the best of intentions, are angels all the time. So let's look to sincere good intentions and not be hasty to get to high-falutin' when speaking about someone else's actions!
:rose: :cry:
:doh: 
This doesn't just go for swinging, it goes for various casual relationships, one night stands, 'fuck-buddy' relationships, on-off relationships, or shagging an ex. The challenge is to be open and upfront before you dip your emotional privates in their personal space to make sure it is consensual. If in doubt, don't.
Having said that it's easy to talk in absolutes when none of us, even with the best of intentions, are angels all the time. So let's look to sincere good intentions and not be hasty to get to high-falutin' when speaking about someone else's actions!
:rose: :cry:
:doh: 