Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

Social Conformity & Swinging

last reply
79 replies
3.8k views
5 watchers
0 likes
Unknown User
Quote by VenusnMars
I drove home and missed the meat . Its already at the tailing off innuendo and jokes stage , but a good thread all the same . Thanks all for the good read :-)
G

I was mediocre today! lol
Venusxxx
YOU!!!!
never................... :grin:
the Laird
xx
VenusnMars
Sex God
Flattery will get you everywhere :rascal:
Venusxxx
Unknown User
Quote by VenusnMars
Flattery will get you everywhere :rascal:
Venusxxx

Here's hoping wink
the Laird
xx
edinbughchris
Sexpert
Quote by LadyFeeBee
OK Chris if you can now explain the offside rule to us Rugby types your work here will be done wink
the Laird

PMSL! rotflmao
It was nothing really.................
Pint on Saturday night then??
the Laird
I guess . . . as long as you don't quiz me about the Six Nations . . . confused
westerross
Sex God
Quote by edinbughchris
OK Chris if you can now explain the offside rule to us Rugby types your work here will be done wink
the Laird

PMSL! rotflmao
It was nothing really.................
Pint on Saturday night then??
the Laird
I guess . . . as long as you don't quiz me about the Six Nations . . . confused
Who mentioned the Grand Slam ?? :rotflmao:
Unknown User
Quote by edinbughchris
OK Chris if you can now explain the offside rule to us Rugby types your work here will be done wink
the Laird

PMSL! rotflmao
It was nothing really.................
Pint on Saturday night then??
the Laird
I guess . . . as long as you don't quiz me about the Six Nations . . . confused
Six nations, was there a six nations?? No dont know a thing about it
Rainbows dont you start mad
C'mon the Welsh :wink:
the Laird
Unknown User
If I might be so bold as to drag this thread away from the rugby and back on track (sorry your Lordship!) I would like to offer my 2p.
Conformity is about control. Societies have many ways of ensuring that the bulk of the population move in the general direction that those who have clawed their way to the top decree as being desirable or necessary. For a considerable length of time (all of our recorded history anyway) men have had the upper hand in our society and have exercised this in many ways. One of the ways was to try and control both reproduction and the freedom of women (BTW, I am a man writing this and I am not trying to start a feminist debate!) as individuals within society. Men (in general terms) are always afraid that the child they are rearing may not be their own (whereas a woman always knows she is the mother and more than likely knows who the father is) and the only way for men to ensure that 'their' woman bore 'their' child was to ensure that she couldn't have sexual access to any other man. There are biological arguments for this (some of which I find hard to accept) but a lot, in my opinion, has to do with the perception of power that children, especially sons, gave a man in the past (these ideas still linger on).
If you restrict a woman's freedom (sexual or otherwise) the path is left open for men to create the society that appeared to benefit them more, and this is what we can see has been done. The current views on sexuality do indeed stem from the Christian Church but they grew from the previous Jewish teachings (as outlined in the Old Testament of the Christian Bible). However, if you read the OT it is quite obvious that while women were expected to be monogamous the same was not the case for men. In fact, It was accepted/expected that men would have more than one wife and father many children. These children were obviously not brought up in our nuclear family environment of today but, as far as we know, it was a none-the-less successful method for child rearing (which negates the arguments about monogamy and child rearing). (Other societies at the time had rules that actively forced women into sexual activity with strangers with pregnancy as the goal so monogamy is not the only path advocated, albeit that the society that did has triumphed to this day – though who is to say that has any bearing on it doing so.) The Christians changed the rules to say that men were expected to have only one wife and, on the face of it, men and women were governed by the same set of sexual laws. But the reality was somewhat different in that the female transgressors of these laws were much more likely to receive the ultimate penalty (death) for their actions than the males were. Generally men sowing their oats was tolerated (if not always accepted or encouraged) whereas women doing the same was not.
We can see this attitude has lingered on to the present day in that promiscuous men are still generally viewed as 'studs' where as women behaving in the same manner are branded 'sluts'. The bounds of tolerance are shifting (in a more positive direction) but still the attitudes remain. We now have a society where, legally anyway, homosexuality is not supposed to be discriminated against but this goes against the grain for many, many people. It is generally accepted that single young people are going to be out there shagging their way through early adult-hood but again, while this is tolerated it is not really welcomed - especially where women are concerned. But once early adult-hood is over people are supposed to settle down and get on with raising a family. Sex is for reproduction alone after all! Many men (certainly many in my acquaintance) have the attitude that it is natural for them to sleep around but if the caught their wives/girlfriends doing it....(well, let's just say I heard a report on the radio on Monday that suggested a good proportion of people - male and female - accept that violence against their other half is acceptable in cases of infidelity evil ). The idea that people who are in a committed relationship would give their partner the freedom to have sex with others is so far removed from some people's narrow view of what is right and proper that it is beyond what many can cope with. This becomes a threat to them and when people are threatened the often resort to fighting back.
It still boils down to control. Reproduction or political and economic control of women is not such an issue anymore (though some would still wish it to be and the ideas that contribute to this still linger on) but our society is as heavily controlled now as it has ever been. It is just that the controls as financial and political rather than religious. Homosexuality is growing accepted as a 'medical condition' (the ‘poor dears’ can't help themselves, however much we pray for them or try and beat it out of them confused ) whereas actively choosing to share yourself and partner with someone is a threat to the rules of society. People like us who make these choices to be sexually liberal are viewed as a threat to Order (if not Law) because if we are prepared to make one such radical departure from conformity, what else are we prepared to do? :shock: Bisexuality is also viewed as a ‘choice’ but male and female bisexuality is viewed with different eyes (as is male and female homosexuality – though there are numerous factors and no one ‘view’) and two women can get away with kissing in a club – so long as it is viewed as a way for them to attract men as, after all, they are only playing and waiting for a ‘real man’ to satisfy them! lol Two men kissing ‘in an attempt to attract a woman’ would not be tolerated! Female bisexuality is becoming more and more commonly depicted in the mainstream (Madonna, Britney and Christina anyone?) but it is still associated with heterosexual woman playing around and ‘they don’t really mean it anyway, not when they meet a real man’. Male bisexuality is generally viewed as gay men who are trying to be heterosexual when they should just ‘get off the fence and admit they are gay!’
The current media interest in swinging is purely financially driven. Sex always sells. Isn’t is strange how a society that prides itself on prudery is so keen to read the salacious details of other people’s sexual activities? Bit of a double standard in operation here! :?
Sadly we do still live in the 1940s (though even here the disparity between what was acceptable and tolerated in men and women was radically different) and we are of the number that do not want to be ‘outed’ as swingers. E’s work would probably kick up a fuss in any case because she has to work with young people. The fact that we are, as a couple, generally not interested in people under the age of 25 and certainly have no interest in anyone who is not of legal age would not be taken into account – just the fact that she was part of a ‘fringe’ group the practiced ‘unconventional’ sexual activities (we are actually very ‘vanilla’ and happy that way) would be enough to throw a spanner in the works. As to our friends; there are none that we actively want to welcome into the swinging world and we are not in the habit of talking about our sex lives with them in any case. I do know that a good few of my friends would not be able to cope with our activities and I would definitely lose some if I suggested to them that I was in any way interested in other men. I often wish my existing friends weren’t so conventional but I like them none the less and the desire to seek more open minded friends are what have brought both of us to SH anyway! biggrin
Sorry for the length of post – I tend to be a bit wordy and this is a pet topic of mine anyway – and I hope I haven’t offended anyone with the language I use. I tend to be a bit flippant – especially when talking about the narrow minded around us – so if anything I have written appears to offend I apologise but I also ask you to read it again but try to see it in the non-offending manner that I intend. Actually, I was trying to offend to narrow-minded – I hope I succeeded! cool
H
Ice_Pie
Sex God
Quote by donsidelovers
If I might be so bold as to drag this thread away from the rugby and back on track...
(remainder snipped but read with interest)

With respect, your post wasn't particularly 'on-track', but interesting nonetheless.
We were discussing, it seems to me, where people are on the Secret - Open swinging continuum. I recognise that society's expectation of physical monogamy probably influences a lot of swingers wrt how openly they talk about their sex lives, but introducing a sermon against mysogeny is stretching the point a bit, I feel. Apart from anything else, the desire to restrict one's spouse's access to the opposite sex isn't exclusive to men, so I think that's a bit of a red herring wrt what this discussion is about. Your argument only holds water in this context if it is true that monogamy would not exist in a fully egalitarian society, which is an unsupportable assumption, IMO. Monogamy has existed in patriarchal and matriarchal societies alike, and so I find it more reasonable to suppose that it has less to do with men's desire to control women than it has to do with the reproductive instincts of both sexes.
If you acknowledge that our instincts are much older than contraceptive technology and take reproduction out of the equation, what you're left with is innate behaviour that can be consciously over-ridden with no evolutionary consequences. Whether those instincts can be de-programmed at the subconscious level, or what long-term social effect that might have if it were possible, is a whole other discussion and not really what this thread is about, IMO.
Regards,
Ice
Unknown User
Quote by Ice Pie
If I might be so bold as to drag this thread away from the rugby and back on track...
(remainder snipped but read with interest)

With respect, your post wasn't particularly 'on-track', but interesting nonetheless.
We were discussing, it seems to me, where people are on the Secret - Open swinging continuum. I recognise that society's expectation of physical monogamy probably influences a lot of swingers wrt how openly they talk about their sex lives, but introducing a sermon against mysogeny is stretching the point a bit, I feel. Apart from anything else, the desire to restrict one's spouse's access to the opposite sex isn't exclusive to men, so I think that's a bit of a red herring wrt what this discussion is about. Your argument only holds water in this context if it is true that monogamy would not exist in a fully egalitarian society, which is an unsupportable assumption, IMO. Monogamy has existed in patriarchal and matriarchal societies alike, and so I find it more reasonable to suppose that it has less to do with men's desire to control women than it has to do with the reproductive instincts of both sexes.
If you acknowledge that our instincts are much older than contraceptive technology and take reproduction out of the equation, what you're left with is innate behaviour that can be consciously over-ridden with no evolutionary consequences. Whether those instincts can be de-programmed at the subconscious level, or what long-term social effect that might have if it were possible, is a whole other discussion and not really what this thread is about, IMO.
Regards,
Ice
Fair points Ice! And I am glad you found it interesting - even if not particualrly useful here!
I didn't realise I was writing a sermon and I am sorry if it came across that way. What I thought we were discussing was why people feel the need to keep their swinging activities secret and I thought I was trying to contribute some thoughts towards understanding that reality. The pros and cons of monogamy, in a reproductive sense and in relation to the affect on the way a society functions, are in the realms of nurture vs. nature and a whole other topic indeed. What is true is that our moral code (here in the UK) is very much related to the teachings of Christianity and whatever anyone here personally thinks about the Church in their daily lives the fact that it is the foundation of the codes and laws of this country have to be fact that these moral codes are shared in a variety of cultures and religions neither proves or disproves whether the current views on sexuality are in any way linked to human instinct. Where the rules the Church formulated arise from is a whole other matter and I agree that we can discuss that another time.
I never meant to imply that men are the only ones to feel sexual jealousy or wish to restrict the activities of their partners but was merely pointing out that the rules - as enforced over many centuries of history - have typically allowed men somewhat more of a free reign in sexual matters - and stil do. This might be why there are many more single males looking for a quick shag on this forum than there are single females (or it could be that women find it easier to 'pull' in their daily lives and don't need the services of SH?). I also don't want to imply that mysogeny rules the day today (though in many ways it still does) but that it did when the moral codes we live by today were established.
I hope that helps explain my motivation in writing what I did.
H
LordZenx
Sexlightened
Having just read the whole thread, heres my two pence worth wink
Should we tell people about our life style choices ? I don't tell people about my other hobbies and interests unless they are interested and ask me about them, and then only if they ask in a open way, not 'Are you a freak then ?” Discussing swinging with swingers is like discussing football with other fans, there's not much point unless all are interested in the subject matter.
I also have a concern about discussing swinging with non like minded people due to the basic bigotry of humanity. As society clamps down on racism, sexism, ageism, there will always be a need for the animal part of humanity to have an enemy, be that the strange looking man down the end of the street or those with 'weird' sexual activities, just look what happened to the head of Beoing.
I understand those that want to stand out and be proud, but its always those that raise their heads above the parapet that get them shot off first, and to be honest I would rather it be a collection of people who actively search out those of a similar interest than all and sundry giving it a try.
westerross
Sex God
I'm sorry guys I think I got most of that but as they said to Mozart about his musical notes 'Too many words - Too many words'
Does it boil down to reproductive sexual values being applied to non-reproductive sexual behaviour, which is therefore irrelevant?
DreamerHelen
Sex God
I agree with KitKat here, when I first started Swinging I wanted to tell everybody....but now there are only two of my non-swinging friends that know about me...and they're totally accepting of it.....
And I agree with Rogerthedragon....why do we hide things from our children? Being naked is not a crime, it shouldn't be a no-no when dealing with kids......
Unknown User
Quote by westerross
I'm sorry guys I think I got most of that but as they said to Mozart about his musical notes 'Too many words - Too many words'
Does it boil down to reproductive sexual values being applied to non-reproductive sexual behaviour, which is therefore irrelevant?

Yes and no! lol
My view is that many of the social conventions we accept as normal are just what we have grown to accept as normal, not what is natural for a human being in a totally wild state. But we humans have not been that free and wild for thousands of years so the argument is a bit irrelevant. However that does not mean we need simply to accept social norms as being the only way in which to operate - though we do have to accept, rightly or wrongly, that if we step to far away from what is considered acceptable and conventional we are going to be perceived as a threat and treated accordingly.
We basically exist in a situation where swinging is legally acceptable but not yet socially acceptable. In other words we are free to do as we please within the law but we have to realise that we are not necessarily going to be left in peace if we out ourselves while doing it. But that will not be news to anyone here...
But yes, the conventions that govern sexual behaviour are not simply about reproductive aspect of sex even when they sometimes pretent to be.
targaid
Sexlightened
Another part of the problem that we all face is the incredible hypocisy rife throughout our society, especially in matters of censorship. For example, it is legal to have sex, marry join the army & kill people at 16 whilst it is illegal to watch movies containing depictions -or worse, actual images - until 18 confused
There's the attitude about it being all right for other folk to do things 'as long as they don't do it in front of me.' which has its place, but why should gay men, for example, be restricted from showing affection in public in case they offend others?
Ulitmately, it all boils down to us being a seriously dysfunctional species who are always looking for a way to discriminate and hate others under some feeble veneer of justification. It doesn't particularly matter how tolerant you are somewhere you have a prejudice. There are many who would think this way about our lifestyle and I, for one, only stick it down someone else's throat when asked (sorry, just couldn't maintain a serious head any longer)
Rainbows
Sex God
I am going to drag this one back up to the top becuase I found it a fascinating thread when it was first posted, but also because recent events have seen me have to face the bigotry and prejudice of the Lesbian/gay community. And I make that distinction between Lesbian and Gay, by the way - becuase even within that marginalised group there is prejudice and dissension.
What prompted me to come back to this thread was a PM I recieved from a member of this site. Someone whose opinion I value and was not upset with. She just made me think again about social norms and mores. She used the word "rules", which interested me. "You know the rules of the community".
And so I find that every aspect of my life is governed by rules. Rules set by whom? As I said in a previous post - the majority? Or those that shout the loudest. Becuase those that shout the loudest are always the ones that are scared the most.
I made a decision today to remove myself from the Lesbian/Gay community here in my home town. I decided that I can't change the prejudice in that community from the inside, and have decided to get actively inolved in bi-sexual "politics". I know this isn't about swinging, but it is about trying to change people's perceptions. I think the gay/lesbian world has come far, but that doesn't give them the right to now stand up and knock back what they don't understand. Just as racism by black people agianst white is no more rigth than that of white people against black - so is prejudice within the gay community not "right". Sorry - just my opinion.
And before you start saying that it is a waste of time - cast your minds back to the Suffragettes, or something loser to my heart - I was involved in the anti apartheid movement in South Africa. I had friends thrown into detention for speaking out against what they believed to be wrong. People lost their lives - but ultimately a result was gained. It took many years - but it happened.
As for sticking your head over the parapet and getting shot for it. If it wasn't for those brave people who have stuck their head over the parpapet in many instances, we would live in a completely different world today.
Okay - getting off my soapbox now!
aRSexx :color:
tallnhairy
Sex God
Quote by Rainbows
I am going to drag this one back up to the top becuase I found it a fascinating thread when it was first posted, but also because recent events have seen me have to face the bigotry and prejudice of the Lesbian/gay community. And I make that distinction between Lesbian and Gay, by the way - becuase even within that marginalised group there is prejudice and dissension.

Rainbows thanks for bringing this up, I missed this thread the first time round and it was a damn good read. I think a lot of the negative press comes from the fact for many people swinging is a very bad choice. Not to mention the fact that people like to laugh at anything smutty or different (not that I think swinging is, but to them it is always portrayed that way).
For those with the self confidence it can offer many positive things, and society should feck off and leave them to it. Tolerance is a big word in the world today, but it seems to be rarely practiced, and more often than not used to opress views or impose further restrictions on people.
For those people who are not confident I think swinging is a very bad thing. Playing away is a quick way to damage a relationship, and even amoung swingers groups we have seen the odd unfortunate casualty. However this does not make swinging itself wrong, wrong for those couples yes, but not wrong in itself.
I think we are a long way off from acceptance, but as you say we have to start somewhere. One of the first things I think the non-swing community need to accept is just because they allow others to be swingers, they don't need to swing themselves. There seems to be a thought that it is a slippery slope, if we let 1 person have a MMF soon everyone will. That is just not the case., once the rest of society realises this maybe we can work on their prejudices. Until then we will have to put up with the discrimination, where even socialites like myself can't be fully open about our friends....
Unknown User
Quote by Rainbows
Okay - getting off my soapbox now!
aRSexx :color:

Rainbows,
With what you have got to say I would be happy for you to get back on your soapbox!
H xx wink
Unknown User
I think Donsidelover's 'sermon' was absolutely on track. It wasn't about misogyny at all. There is a difference between misogyny and patriachy and any Foucauldian sociologist will tell you thst the west is a patriachal system of power and control.
I too am fascinated by the rules and how they arise. The rules of the current west are that we must be heterosexual and monogomous, as if these things are natural and not utterly created by society for organisational purposes.
There is some fabulous reading to be had in these areas, and I recommend a writer called Rubin who discusses the way in which rules come about and for what purpose. How 'moral panics' shift from one subject to another so that where things like alcoholis used to be the biggy, now we have non-monogamy.
Rubin's most famous chapter called Thinking Sex isn't available online but here's a summary and references for anyone interested:
MikeNorth
Sex God
Quote by Rainbows
I made a decision today to remove myself from the Lesbian/Gay community here in my home town. I decided that I can't change the prejudice in that community from the inside, and have decided to get actively inolved in bi-sexual "politics".
aRSexx :color:

Rainbows, I know what a huge change this is going to mean for you, and I wish you the very best of luck. From your friends in here you will certainly get all the support you need. kiss
Now you can grow your hair longer LOL.
Mike.