Not sure it is, I don't have to swing I do it because I enjoy it, it is not a need.
I know that Germaine Greer has said that she thinks that besides the two sexualities, Heterosexual and Homosexual, that perhaps should be considered as a third.
None of the above I believe can be considered choices where as swinging, I feel, is.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
swinging A sexual orientation?
Sex God
Last thing you need in swinging is bloody procreation so Darwin? ....out the window for us other f*ckers 
Homosexuality is a sexuality i.e. homosexuals are born not made the same as heterosexuals.
Swinging/threesomes/gangbangs are choice, if there is anyone out there that HAS to swing etc I would be interested in knowing because that then would imply that there is an extra sexuality, or atleast it would mean there could be others.
We, and I mean A_tre and myself, choose to do this, its fun, sexy and highly enjoyable but if she turned around to me and said she didnt want us to do it anymore we could stop.
Swinging/threesomes/gangbangs are choice, if there is anyone out there that HAS to swing etc I would be interested in knowing because that then would imply that there is an extra sexuality, or atleast it would mean there could be others.
We, and I mean A_tre and myself, choose to do this, its fun, sexy and highly enjoyable but if she turned around to me and said she didnt want us to do it anymore we could stop.
There is some merit in that, but brief encounters does not necessarily improve the gene pool choice. Humans select mates (if they know it or not) because they feel their mate is a good bet genetically speaking.
On the merit side it could ensure your genes are continued in the event that a fatal event happens to your "family" offspring. But it doesn't allow for the competitive nature of humans not wanting another mans sperm swimming in your chosen mates tubes (obviously from a male point of view)
Actually perhaps swinging is a more female thing than a males? Allowing her suitors respective sperm to fight their way through.
I dunno.
On the merit side it could ensure your genes are continued in the event that a fatal event happens to your "family" offspring. But it doesn't allow for the competitive nature of humans not wanting another mans sperm swimming in your chosen mates tubes (obviously from a male point of view)
Actually perhaps swinging is a more female thing than a males? Allowing her suitors respective sperm to fight their way through.
I dunno.
Quote by fluff_n_stuff
Isn't it more likely to be a throw-back to our ancestors who got laid with whoever, wherever and whenever they could in order to maximise the chances of passing on their genes?
you see, this is where the gene-argument comes in.
(and I don't mean Gene Hunt "fire up the Quattro, I Gene Jeanie; Let yourself go, oo-whoahoo, I mean Gene the twisty odd bit of the twin ladder stringie thing).
Our genes do dominate to a great degree our behaviour.
And as mentioned previously, in bold, fucking around helped ensure the spreading and strengthening of the gene-pool.
(and I don't mean the hand-me-down Levi's or Zantos, dare I mention Wrangler?)
as we may know or consider, our genes are not our own, but fight of thier own accord for thier survival (see: , Matt Ridley)
Monogamistic sexual practice is a very recent thing in Human development, and our Genes (no Pepe!!!) predate our species, let alone our societal moors.
'Swinging' may not be a genetic trait and therefore anther 'sexuality', but it does hark back to our earlier selves, 'swinging' from limb to limb, descending onto the sevanah, pulling on our 'shrink to fit' and turning the key in our four wheel drive rally supercar.
we are all animals, and our jeans have it!
Lets fuck!
lp
Sexlightened
According to Darwin we are given sexual drive to procreate and so keep the population going. If men were merely designed to procreate at will spreading their genes as widely as possible then the population would be 1 guy for 100 girls ….. (ahh just thinking of that utopia ! ) As populations tend to settle on equal numbers – after recovering from war, famine etc. men spreading their seed is not required – we are clearly required to bond and bring up children. So there is no evolutionary advantage.
In swingers however I think it is the liberated upbringing that differentiates. Especially with women. Both sexes have a sexual drive but society has for years accepted that blokes – ‘put it about’ so they are called studs etc (generally aspirational terms) where as women who act in the same way are slags etc (generally derogatory terms ) This is because society (run by blokes) has used the excuse of spreading their seed – which I think is a misnomer ! Ok a Guy can father potentially 1000’s of children where as women can just about have 15 (I bet that brings tears to the eyes girls ).
If you have been brought up with a fairly liberal attitude to sex and see it as recreation rather than procreation then one uses ones sexual drive to its full by swinging. Those who don’t swing are repressing their natural drive as they considered it to be ‘wrong’.
We will see when there is true equality between the sexes when the entry price to clubs are the same for single blokes as women – but that was another topic !
So a sexual Orientation – I don’t think so .
Fun and a sign of superior development – oh yes :-)
In swingers however I think it is the liberated upbringing that differentiates. Especially with women. Both sexes have a sexual drive but society has for years accepted that blokes – ‘put it about’ so they are called studs etc (generally aspirational terms) where as women who act in the same way are slags etc (generally derogatory terms ) This is because society (run by blokes) has used the excuse of spreading their seed – which I think is a misnomer ! Ok a Guy can father potentially 1000’s of children where as women can just about have 15 (I bet that brings tears to the eyes girls ).
If you have been brought up with a fairly liberal attitude to sex and see it as recreation rather than procreation then one uses ones sexual drive to its full by swinging. Those who don’t swing are repressing their natural drive as they considered it to be ‘wrong’.
We will see when there is true equality between the sexes when the entry price to clubs are the same for single blokes as women – but that was another topic !
So a sexual Orientation – I don’t think so .
Fun and a sign of superior development – oh yes :-)
Bugger my old boots if we carry on having informed light hearted sexual discussions I may have to dig my thinking head out of the turnip bin and dust it off.
I think sexual energy, for the want of a better word, is primarily genetic as evidenced by my parents and siblings and offspring's behaviours and attitudes and those exhibited by the relatives of other people I know who are deeply into sex----some love it some dont. This doesn't mean that evolution will lead to ever randier humans because fucking a lot doesn't seem to have that much impact on how many of the kids you make reach maturity.
On top of that of course you have social conditioning and life experience.
Now that's just as far as liking sex is concerned, if we move on to swinging then the social/upbringing aspects have even more bearing I think, to the extent that I have met quite a few swingers who don't actually like sex that much but are fulfilling other emotional needs.
In summary I think theres a randy gene not a swinging gene. I think there are as many reasons for becoming a swinger as there are swingers.
I think sexual energy, for the want of a better word, is primarily genetic as evidenced by my parents and siblings and offspring's behaviours and attitudes and those exhibited by the relatives of other people I know who are deeply into sex----some love it some dont. This doesn't mean that evolution will lead to ever randier humans because fucking a lot doesn't seem to have that much impact on how many of the kids you make reach maturity.
On top of that of course you have social conditioning and life experience.
Now that's just as far as liking sex is concerned, if we move on to swinging then the social/upbringing aspects have even more bearing I think, to the extent that I have met quite a few swingers who don't actually like sex that much but are fulfilling other emotional needs.
In summary I think theres a randy gene not a swinging gene. I think there are as many reasons for becoming a swinger as there are swingers.
ah, now then... evolution....
as far as that is concerned, I think we, as a species, have shot ourselves in the foot as soon as we learned to pick up a tool and start 'thinking' for ourselves.
we learned to not only adapt to our environment, but adapt the environment to suit us! To such a degree that the environment is now racing away from us, leaving us playing with our ever less effective tools. (the tools being not practicle and necesary for survival, but life enhancing fripperies that sedate our survival instincts.
as to shooting ourselves in the foot, we made the weapon ourselves... how silly is that?
the nearest we may have gotten to evolutionary progress was in our heads, though now we have the machines to do that for us.
the sooner we go back to picking up a bone-shard and descimating the local populous the better.
ugh let's fuck ugh
lp
as far as that is concerned, I think we, as a species, have shot ourselves in the foot as soon as we learned to pick up a tool and start 'thinking' for ourselves.
we learned to not only adapt to our environment, but adapt the environment to suit us! To such a degree that the environment is now racing away from us, leaving us playing with our ever less effective tools. (the tools being not practicle and necesary for survival, but life enhancing fripperies that sedate our survival instincts.
as to shooting ourselves in the foot, we made the weapon ourselves... how silly is that?
the nearest we may have gotten to evolutionary progress was in our heads, though now we have the machines to do that for us.
the sooner we go back to picking up a bone-shard and descimating the local populous the better.
ugh let's fuck ugh
lp
Orgasminator
Quote by Kaznkev
In the dim and distant past I took a uni course on Sexual selection,where risk taking was explained darwinistically.
This set me musing,I can see Evolutionary advantages to non monogomous ppl,which suggests its possible there is a "swinging gene"
So is it a sexual orientation?
discuss!
Desperation.....
Quote by __random_orbit__
ah, now then... evolution....
as far as that is concerned, I think we, as a species, have shot ourselves in the foot as soon as we learned to pick up a tool and start 'thinking' for ourselves.
we learned to not only adapt to our environment, but adapt the environment to suit us! To such a degree that the environment is now racing away from us, leaving us playing with our ever less effective tools. (the tools being not practicle and necesary for survival, but life enhancing fripperies that sedate our survival instincts.
as to shooting ourselves in the foot, we made the weapon ourselves... how silly is that?
the nearest we may have gotten to evolutionary progress was in our heads, though now we have the machines to do that for us.
the sooner we go back to picking up a bone-shard and descimating the local populous the better.
ugh let's fuck ugh
lp
Its true we have developed tools that have allowed us to populate areas of the globe that are less than perfect for the naked ape. But the fact that it has led to a change in the environment that we live doesn't mean that we cannot use our tools to adapt further. Its not ideal I know but it may be our only course of action.
As far as swinging goes, we have also developed tools for this also, where as in the past men and women of a certain age would slowly lose the sex side of their lives we can now look forward to good sex well into our old age. As we are now having more sex than ever before will this have an effect on our evolution? I doubt it, unless its only the randy buggers on here procreating in which case I can see a world full of people copulating left right and center, mind you if you go down Broad St in Birmingham on a Sat night you could be forgiven for thinking it has already happened. :jagsatwork:
Monogomy is an artificial state for humans imposed by the church as a means of control.
Mother nature intended multiple partners. What "we" do is ignore what the church/society preaches in favour of what comes naturally.
Some people suit monogamy. Some people don't, but they "do" monogamy because it's what's expected of them. Some people suit Polyamoury. Others suit Promiscuity. Rollop the Trollop suits rubber.
Such is life.
Mother nature intended multiple partners. What "we" do is ignore what the church/society preaches in favour of what comes naturally.
Some people suit monogamy. Some people don't, but they "do" monogamy because it's what's expected of them. Some people suit Polyamoury. Others suit Promiscuity. Rollop the Trollop suits rubber.
Such is life.
Orgasminator
Quote by Kaznkev
In the dim and distant past I took a uni course on Sexual selection,where risk taking was explained darwinistically.
This set me musing,I can see Evolutionary advantages to non monogomous ppl,which suggests its possible there is a "swinging gene"
So is it a sexual orientation?
discuss!
On a more serious note is swinging something that has always been appealing to you(all.....or is it something that has come into your lives after lets say long term rels(marriages) that have broken down and there is of a bit of been there done that attitude and now time for something completely different..?
Sex God
Genetics? Nope, me saw a pro gramme on the telly :shock:
I'll make it up to you 
When people - ie the media ( God bless em 
) - talk about swinging, they make it sound as though it's something that was invented in the 60s a la keys in the fruit bowl type of parties.
Look back to the Roman, my God those people INVENTED swinging with their orgies, wife swapping, shagging the slaves etc etc.
I've heard and read that some think the darker side of human nature ( no need to list that :dry: ) is a recent discovery but surely it seems that way because with the advance in tv and media as a whole, it's more publicised than ever before. How many times have you heard people say 'never heard of that kind of thing in MY day' True, because it wasn't talked about years ago. Are the trying to make out that the Victorians never did anything a nun would frown upon? Opium dens and open prostitution spring to mind but who's to say orgies and swinging didn't go on then? Even the Georgians were a hedonistic lot!
I'd say it's not so much down to genes and evolution, more to us being a more open and widely reported culture these days. I'd say it's a LOT more popular than we can ever know!
) - talk about swinging, they make it sound as though it's something that was invented in the 60s a la keys in the fruit bowl type of parties.Look back to the Roman, my God those people INVENTED swinging with their orgies, wife swapping, shagging the slaves etc etc.
I've heard and read that some think the darker side of human nature ( no need to list that :dry: ) is a recent discovery but surely it seems that way because with the advance in tv and media as a whole, it's more publicised than ever before. How many times have you heard people say 'never heard of that kind of thing in MY day' True, because it wasn't talked about years ago. Are the trying to make out that the Victorians never did anything a nun would frown upon? Opium dens and open prostitution spring to mind but who's to say orgies and swinging didn't go on then? Even the Georgians were a hedonistic lot!
I'd say it's not so much down to genes and evolution, more to us being a more open and widely reported culture these days. I'd say it's a LOT more popular than we can ever know!
Quote by Kaznkevexactly... thats what I said, only I did with a certain jun ey say stoopid
Does not the very fact there have always been sexually adventurous ppl throuhout history suggest this is something some are are predisposed to "swing"
could not this predisposition be genetic?
its in ya wranglers. Predisposition.
lp