well coming from a media background, and given the recent media hype to do with swingers, my one concern is this ...........
given that at a private party we are to some extent, in the knowledge we should be secure, as a result we would all tend to dress far more erotically than at say a vanilla friendly venue , my point is that its ok to have the two different kinds of meet, but make sure its clear before hand, imagine turning up at home after a 3 or 4 hour drive to find yourself splashed across a newspaper or in a documentary on tv, sounds extreme i know, but it can happen and has ........ ask stan collymore !!
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
PLYMOUTH
Quote by serps
well coming from a media background, and given the recent media hype to do with swingers, my one concern is this ...........
given that at a private party we are to some extent, in the knowledge we should be secure, as a result we would all tend to dress far more erotically than at say a vanilla friendly venue , my point is that its ok to have the two different kinds of meet, but make sure its clear before hand, imagine turning up at home after a 3 or 4 hour drive to find yourself splashed across a newspaper or in a documentary on tv, sounds extreme i know, but it can happen and has ........ ask stan collymore !!
You mean like this?
Quote by The Munch Organiser
HI
Plymouth meet
Saturday October 29th
Pub Venue
Pub, Plymouth. We shall be upstairs in the Pub, as you enter the pub, it is laid out like this. This room has its own bar, and ladies toilet.
but the meet itself is at time. An identifiable feature will be on our table. The pub does get busy, so if you arrive very late you might have a hard time finding us. There is parking in the area, but again they will get busy later on.
This invite is for you, please DO NOT bring anyone who is not on the guest list, or has NOT been invited.
Sexlightened
Hiya All,
We have been to both the plymouth meets, and had a great time at them, didn't think i would be reading what i am about the last one!
It was as last time a great evening, and Devon1 & Co should be congratulated on the time and effort spent on organising said events, it is difficult to find a private venue, especially down here, and what if one is found and needs paying for, who pays for it? as we all know, not everyone on an invite list who says they are going turns up, so you couldn't very well say "pay me when you get there" you could be hundreds of pounds out of pocket!! not to mention the venue could be too big if half of the invites didn't turn up!
If it had been called a social meet, would all this fuss been made?
Sorry if i am not understood properly, i would rather talk than type.
Take Care all.
PnH
We have been to both the plymouth meets, and had a great time at them, didn't think i would be reading what i am about the last one!
It was as last time a great evening, and Devon1 & Co should be congratulated on the time and effort spent on organising said events, it is difficult to find a private venue, especially down here, and what if one is found and needs paying for, who pays for it? as we all know, not everyone on an invite list who says they are going turns up, so you couldn't very well say "pay me when you get there" you could be hundreds of pounds out of pocket!! not to mention the venue could be too big if half of the invites didn't turn up!
If it had been called a social meet, would all this fuss been made?
Sorry if i am not understood properly, i would rather talk than type.
Take Care all.
PnH
Quote by the owl and the pussycat
If it had been called a social meet, would all this fuss been made?
Sorry if i am not understood properly, i would rather talk than type.
Take Care all.
PnH
I don't think it -munches seem to fit the same open pub form too.
The thing I'm disappointed about is that what should have been a :welcome: thread has been hi-jacked into a serious discussion about munches. (Can these two elements be separated?)
Chris
Quote by serps
well coming from a media background, and given the recent media hype to do with swingers, my one concern is this ...........
given that at a private party . . . . . . . . . .
To me, and a few I've spoken to last night and this morning, where I've highlighted above - is the crux of the matter.
It comes down to terminology.
I don't think for one minute, serps that you meant "private party" in your post; I think you meant "munch"
If you did mean private party, then that's an entirely different topic.
Orgasminator
I find the fact that this thread is stil running, really sad :cry:
Someone mentioned the fact that any reporters might have spotted the 'swingers' (by them dressing more erotically) among the 'normal' pub goers. In answer to that, during a brief moment i had during the night, I spotted 5 very naughty nurses, 2 ladies wearing pvc etc, and none of them were with us
This was one of the reasons this venue was picked, a lot of the pub drinkers go there first in their clubwear, before moving on. So spotting erotically dressed swingers, would be a bit tricky :lol:
I have resisted the temptation to comment much on this thread, as i didn't want to be accused of being biased, but luckily others have made some very positive coments in defence of the venue.
I was hoping to arrange a private venue this time, and I kept the pub as a standby, in case a private room was not found in time. As i didn't want to cancel the event, i used the pub. After this meet, I was not going to use the pub any longer, and i am still trying to find a suitable room, in a safe location, for future events. But as some other organisers will know, finding a venue can be a lot of hard work. The pub wasn't chosen 'will nilly', but was the best location to be found.
A local BDSM group have been using another pub in Plymouth for there monthly meets for sometime now, and as yet no problems have occurred.
I think things maybe organised a bit different down in the far southwest compared to other events in London for example. There are a number of reasons for this. We have a very dispersed local population, very poor transport system, getting anywhere is always hard work. Rooms to rent are hard to come by, etc etc.
Any event stands or falls by the feedback by those attending, and i thank everyone that has been positive in there replies. I take on board any criticism that has been made, although as yet that has only been by those that did not attend this weekend.
I hope plymgal has not been put off posting any further by this thread. If she has, what a sad situation :cry:
Someone mentioned the fact that any reporters might have spotted the 'swingers' (by them dressing more erotically) among the 'normal' pub goers. In answer to that, during a brief moment i had during the night, I spotted 5 very naughty nurses, 2 ladies wearing pvc etc, and none of them were with us
This was one of the reasons this venue was picked, a lot of the pub drinkers go there first in their clubwear, before moving on. So spotting erotically dressed swingers, would be a bit tricky :lol: I have resisted the temptation to comment much on this thread, as i didn't want to be accused of being biased, but luckily others have made some very positive coments in defence of the venue.
I was hoping to arrange a private venue this time, and I kept the pub as a standby, in case a private room was not found in time. As i didn't want to cancel the event, i used the pub. After this meet, I was not going to use the pub any longer, and i am still trying to find a suitable room, in a safe location, for future events. But as some other organisers will know, finding a venue can be a lot of hard work. The pub wasn't chosen 'will nilly', but was the best location to be found.
A local BDSM group have been using another pub in Plymouth for there monthly meets for sometime now, and as yet no problems have occurred.
I think things maybe organised a bit different down in the far southwest compared to other events in London for example. There are a number of reasons for this. We have a very dispersed local population, very poor transport system, getting anywhere is always hard work. Rooms to rent are hard to come by, etc etc.
Any event stands or falls by the feedback by those attending, and i thank everyone that has been positive in there replies. I take on board any criticism that has been made, although as yet that has only been by those that did not attend this weekend.
I hope plymgal has not been put off posting any further by this thread. If she has, what a sad situation :cry:
Plymouth is the haunt of Westward Bound, its BDSM balls are advertised/plastered over a lot of the buses in the city. Plymouth is use to outrageous behaviour.
And the gear the clubbers wear is a lot more revealing than swingers. But the crux of being a swinger is surely discretion...and therein lies the rub, you do not have to be discrete if you are out of town and live many miles away, but whilst you live in town (like us) you do.
A more private venue would be far superior choice, but that becomes cost prohibitive due to lack of numbers.
And the gear the clubbers wear is a lot more revealing than swingers. But the crux of being a swinger is surely discretion...and therein lies the rub, you do not have to be discrete if you are out of town and live many miles away, but whilst you live in town (like us) you do.
A more private venue would be far superior choice, but that becomes cost prohibitive due to lack of numbers.
People keep reffering to the fact that many who have posted on this thread were not there......
So what I say....
The main topic of conversation quickly became the fact that it was a "munch" yet held in an open enviroment..
It has already been said on the thanks thread that non members were told that you were a group of swingers having a get together...
What if one of those non members was a reporter or knew a reporter?
How would you feel waking up Sunday Morning to see yourself on the front page??
I know that one person who was down to go but eventually couldnt make it would have been absolutely horrified and would almost certainly have lost their very high profile job if that had happened....
Sorry if you feel the origional thread has been "highjacked" but in matters like this I believe its very important to highligh not only the things that were done well but also the things which in future need improving..
So what I say....
The main topic of conversation quickly became the fact that it was a "munch" yet held in an open enviroment..
It has already been said on the thanks thread that non members were told that you were a group of swingers having a get together...
What if one of those non members was a reporter or knew a reporter?
How would you feel waking up Sunday Morning to see yourself on the front page??
I know that one person who was down to go but eventually couldnt make it would have been absolutely horrified and would almost certainly have lost their very high profile job if that had happened....
Sorry if you feel the origional thread has been "highjacked" but in matters like this I believe its very important to highligh not only the things that were done well but also the things which in future need improving..
Quote by Clare and Steve
Organising a munch can be bloody hard work as can be finding suitable if everyone in attendance knew in advance that it wasnt going to be held in a seperate room then why not expect "Vanillas" to be there?
Agreed but.....
A long time ago I said that IMHO if a gathering in a non private place is organised then should it not be termed a social as opposed to a munch??
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
Quote by Steve_Mids
Organising a munch can be bloody hard work as can be finding suitable if everyone in attendance knew in advance that it wasnt going to be held in a seperate room then why not expect "Vanillas" to be there?
Agreed but.....
A long time ago I said that IMHO if a gathering in a non private place is organised then should it not be termed a social as opposed to a munch??
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
I completely agree
Quote by Clare and Steve
Organising a munch can be bloody hard work as can be finding suitable if everyone in attendance knew in advance that it wasnt going to be held in a seperate room then why not expect "Vanillas" to be there?
Agreed but.....
A long time ago I said that IMHO if a gathering in a non private place is organised then should it not be termed a social as opposed to a munch??
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
I completely agree
:D
And Welcome Back both
Quote by Steve_Mids
Organising a munch can be bloody hard work as can be finding suitable if everyone in attendance knew in advance that it wasnt going to be held in a seperate room then why not expect "Vanillas" to be there?
Agreed but.....
A long time ago I said that IMHO if a gathering in a non private place is organised then should it not be termed a social as opposed to a munch??
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
I completely agree
:D
And Welcome Back both
Quote by Clare and SteveI completely agree
Agreed but.....
A long time ago I said that IMHO if a gathering in a non private place is organised then should it not be termed a social as opposed to a munch??
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
I disagree, and so do the guidelines.
Where will I hold it?
Depending on the numbers, it could be in a pub for just a few, or persuade a landlord to close the pub to the general public and fill the place with us! At this point we will assume that we are looking at large numbers.
So there we go, it seems to me that this munch complied with the guidlines.
Quote by Steve_MidsSo, do you think the guidlines should be enforced at a munch, or not?
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
Quote by marmalaidSo, do you think the guidlines should be enforced at a munch, or not?
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
Most certainly....
Munches are non play enviroments where newbies are supposed to be able to meet other like minded people without fear of being pounced upon or having the bee jasus scared out of them..
Quote by Steve_MidsSo, do you think the guidlines should be enforced at a munch, or not?
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
Most certainly....
Munches are non play enviroments where newbies are supposed to be able to meet other like minded people without fear of being pounced upon or having the bee jasus scared out of them..
Good, I'm glad at least that point is clear then.
Now, do you think the guidlines are ok defining that a munch "could be in a pub for just a few" as oposed to "close ... to the general public"? (I think I'm maintaining the spirit of the guidlines with that snip and the full paragraph is quoted above..)
Quote by steve_jYes, but the known fact that this munch was being held in a public and open bar made this likely and obvious to anyone (that has read the guidlines and the PM about this particular munch).
The vanilla's don't know the guidelines, but do know what the meet was. Therefore the discretion of the meet and the people attending is compromised.
Chris
Quote by marmalaidSo, do you think the guidlines should be enforced at a munch, or not?
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
Most certainly....
Munches are non play enviroments where newbies are supposed to be able to meet other like minded people without fear of being pounced upon or having the bee jasus scared out of them..
Good, I'm glad at least that point is clear then.
Now, do you think the guidlines are ok defining that a munch "could be in a pub for just a few" as oposed to "close ... to the general public"? (I think I'm maintaining the spirit of the guidlines with that snip and the full paragraph is quoted above..)
I give in
Its obvious that if a person wasnt there or doesnt go to munches/parties regularly then they are onto a loser as soon as they start
Sex God
Quote by marmalaidI completely agree
Agreed but.....
A long time ago I said that IMHO if a gathering in a non private place is organised then should it not be termed a social as opposed to a munch??
That way there can be no confusion and also behaviour doesnt have to follow guidlines either becasue as well all know a munch is a non play enviroment.
I disagree, and so do the guidelines.
Where will I hold it?
Depending on the numbers, it could be in a pub for just a few, or persuade a landlord to close the pub to the general public and fill the place with us! At this point we will assume that we are looking at large numbers.
So there we go, it seems to me that this munch complied with the guidlines.
Chris..... you are probably right........ to the Letter of the guidelines you are right... it does comply with the guideline.....
in spirit does it comply with the guidelines.... probably not!!!
the bit that you have underlined in correct.... i think it is the next bit which interests me " or persuade a landlord to close the pub to the general public and fill the place with us!"
maybe it is me but doesn't that infer that the venue should be private......
in which case can i suggest a rewrite of the munch guidelines... in the middle of the bit that has been underlined put in some words so that it reads.....it could be in a function room at a pub for just a few..... thus making it more clear.......
sean xxxxxxx
steve_j wrote:
The vanilla's don't know the guidelines, but do know what the meet was. Therefore the discretion of the meet and the people attending is compromised.
Yes, but the known fact that this munch was being held in a public and open bar made this likely and obvious to anyone (that has read the guidlines and the PM about this particular munch).
You have to be joking right?
Just because a munch is held in a public environment does not mean that you expect the public to be involved to such an extent.
Your statemnt suggests that since people knew this event was to be held in a public-bar then you should expect to have any discretion compromised. Sorry but that is utter bollocks.
Quote by Steve_Mids
I give in
Its obvious that if a person wasnt there or doesnt go to munches/parties regularly then they are onto a loser as soon as they start
Again I disagree, I haven't made any comment about people who don't attend should have no opinion, because that would be obvious bullshit.
Are you conceding the point or just walking away?
I'm not trying to be provocate, it's not personal Steve, I don't believe that I know a great deal about you and I probably really know even less about you, if you know what I mean.
Quote by fabio grooverider
Chris..... you are probably right........ to the Letter of the guidelines you are right... it does comply with the guideline.....
in spirit does it comply with the guidelines.... probably not!!!
the bit that you have underlined in correct.... i think it is the next bit which interests me " or persuade a landlord to close the pub to the general public and fill the place with us!"
maybe it is me but doesn't that infer that the venue should be private......
in which case can i suggest a rewrite of the munch guidelines... in the middle of the bit that has been underlined put in some words so that it reads.....it could be in a function room at a pub for just a few..... thus making it more clear.......
sean xxxxxxx
I think it does comply with the spirit, and I did mean to say that. The full phrase uses the word or to show that both are equally valid, and I don't think that the guidelines do infer that the the venue should be private at all, it infers nothing, it states that both are acceptable, it states it clearly and unambiguously, so unless this discussion promotes a change in the thinking of those that wrote the guidelines then I see no need for a rewrite. In fact the munch guidelines have been massively extended since last time I read them, specifically, it would appear, to make them less ambiguous and obviate the need for this sort of discussion.
Chris
Quote by steve_j
The vanilla's don't know the guidelines, but do know what the meet was. Therefore the discretion of the meet and the people attending is compromised.
Quote by marmalaid
Yes, but the known fact that this munch was being held in a public and open bar made this likely and obvious to anyone (that has read the guidlines and the PM about this particular munch).
You have to be joking right?
Just because a munch is held in a public environment does not mean that you expect the public to be involved to such an extent.
Your statemnt suggests that since people knew this event was to be held in a public-bar then you should expect to have any discretion compromised. Sorry but that is utter bollocks.
I'm not joking at all, this is not a funny subject. People's discretion has not been compromised at all. Their privacy is a different matter, the people that attended used their discretion to decided whether or not they should attend as they had all of the facts.
Are you saying that munch members should not converse with other members of the public in an open bar? Public that they knew would likely be there.
Chris.
Quote by marmalaid
The vanilla's don't know the guidelines, but do know what the meet was. Therefore the discretion of the meet and the people attending is compromised.
Quote by marmalaid
Yes, but the known fact that this munch was being held in a public and open bar made this likely and obvious to anyone (that has read the guidlines and the PM about this particular munch).
You have to be joking right?
Just because a munch is held in a public environment does not mean that you expect the public to be involved to such an extent.
Your statemnt suggests that since people knew this event was to be held in a public-bar then you should expect to have any discretion compromised. Sorry but that is utter bollocks.
I'm not joking at all, this is not a funny subject. People's discretion has not been compromised at all. Their privacy is a different matter, the people that attended used their discretion to decided whether or not they should attend as they had all of the facts.
Are you saying that munch members should not converse with other members of the public in an open bar? Public that they knew would likely be there.
Chris.
Your comment regarding "the known fact that this munch was being held in a public and open bar made this likely and obvious to anyone (that has read the guidlines and the PM about this particular munch)" It was not obvious that the public would be made aware that swingers would be in the bar, thereby I stand by what I said earlier that you must have been joking when you made that comment. If you weren't well I don't have anymore to add.
Conversing with members of the public is far different than regailiing them of the attractions of swinging. Has as already been mentioned, munch's are not places to advertise SH or the swinging scene.
Quote by steve_jOk, so your specific point is specifically about me and some others letting on which website we had all met on.
Conversing with members of the public is far different than regailiing them of the attractions of swinging. Has as already been mentioned, munch's are not places to advertise SH or the swinging scene.
I accept your point.
How would you have dealt with the situation, would you have advocated a 'don't mention the website policy, or not mentioning swinging, or what?
Quote by steve_j
A "few close friends on a night out" would have been more appropriate.
I drink there in the week, sometimes with a couple of my directors, the last thing I would like is someone approaching me in front of them and...well you can guess the rest.
That would, indeed, be unfortunate, but the thing that keeps coming back for me is that you then come to a value judgement of the attendees, they should be aware of the possibility of the website being identified, it's only natural to discuss that sort of thing, surely, do they attend ot not? If they do attend to they wear a badge?
Choice, my friend.
I was there
I think the main issue here is NOT the fact that it was held in a public bar. we all knew that and everyone was cool with it, else they wouldnt have come.. and its not the fact that we were dresssed up provocatively, as Plymouth is well renowned for Saturday night is dressing up night, wether it be sexy nurses or police women on a hen night. so no we diddnt stand out like sore thumbs
the problem was the pure FACT that some people find it necessary to tell the whole world and his uncle that they are swingers who have met through a swinging forum and are on a night out. Why? why cant you just say we are all friends on a night out?
So what, you swing, big deal,..... but why do certain people feel the 'need' to always have make such an exclaimation about it? to 'impress' or 'shock'?......to eye up 'new meat' and hope to convert them? its quite sad, how some people seek the attention they crave rather than just enoying each others company on a night out. why make an exhibition of themselves? im not impressed by these types in the least. in fact id go as far as saying 'youre boring'...yawn. why dont you pay more attention to the folks that actually did come to the munch?
i met some lovely people, who i enjoyed having normal civilised non swinging conversations with. I also 'met' some people at the munch who never even acknowledged me all evening.....their loss.
it dosent matter that we were a bunch of swingers on a night out, or railway enthuisasts..no one else is particulary interested, if they were they would be enjoying the pursuits themsleves.
incidentally, on the last PLymouth munch. i know for a fact that someone, went over to a group of vanilla ladies and told then who we were... purely for shock value !......come on grow up.
I think the main issue here is NOT the fact that it was held in a public bar. we all knew that and everyone was cool with it, else they wouldnt have come.. and its not the fact that we were dresssed up provocatively, as Plymouth is well renowned for Saturday night is dressing up night, wether it be sexy nurses or police women on a hen night. so no we diddnt stand out like sore thumbs
the problem was the pure FACT that some people find it necessary to tell the whole world and his uncle that they are swingers who have met through a swinging forum and are on a night out. Why? why cant you just say we are all friends on a night out?
So what, you swing, big deal,..... but why do certain people feel the 'need' to always have make such an exclaimation about it? to 'impress' or 'shock'?......to eye up 'new meat' and hope to convert them? its quite sad, how some people seek the attention they crave rather than just enoying each others company on a night out. why make an exhibition of themselves? im not impressed by these types in the least. in fact id go as far as saying 'youre boring'...yawn. why dont you pay more attention to the folks that actually did come to the munch?
i met some lovely people, who i enjoyed having normal civilised non swinging conversations with. I also 'met' some people at the munch who never even acknowledged me all evening.....their loss.
it dosent matter that we were a bunch of swingers on a night out, or railway enthuisasts..no one else is particulary interested, if they were they would be enjoying the pursuits themsleves.
incidentally, on the last PLymouth munch. i know for a fact that someone, went over to a group of vanilla ladies and told then who we were... purely for shock value !......come on grow up.
