what percentage of Americans swing?

[Mister_Chris]

For no discernible reason, I found myself researching swinging as a cultural phenomenon. The Wikipedia article seems to have a very positive, supporting attitude towards the concept of swinging; many advantages are listed, and the few disadvantages are contested within the article. Other websites, which I suspect were created by swinger advocates, also spoke positively of the lifestyle.

The best article I found was on Psychology Today. They made the point that swingers were young, old, short, tall, doctors, hairdressers, lawyers, car mechanics, and everything in between. Salaries range from $40,000 to $200,000, and the dispersion between blue collar and white collar professions is no different than that of the general population. In fact, there was no external characteristic that identified swingers, except for one thing: an open and flexible attitude towards sex.

Pretty much everything I found suggested that swingers were happier, healthier, and had longer - lived marriages than non swingers (I have excluded the data from Dr. Phil).

Interestingly, almost all swingers are white; and a statistically significant majority are both republican, and religious. It sorta paints Ted Cruz in a whole new light.

I found it interesting that most articles suggested that, while most women swingers identified themselves as bisexual or bi-curious, only a small percentile of male swingers did so; one article suggested that male bisexual or homosexual behavior was actively discouraged. Apparently men and women don't mind watching women go at it, but the same is not true of male/male encounters.

It's also true that different nations have different swing rates. Interestingly, Brits are the most randy of the lot; they swing so much that it's amazing that anyone gets to work on time. England really does swing like a pendulum do. Canadians also swing a lot; after all, the winter nights are six months long, and you have to do something, and the polar bears are getting scarce. The primary difference seems to be that Canadians are more polite. Except to the polar bears.

But the really difficult data point to pin down was the percentage of Americans who swing. Some articles suggested 1/10th of 1 percent; other articles suggested 50%. Wikipedia suggested 2 - 4 percent, and Psychology Today didn't address the issue at all.

Part of the issue seems to be what constitutes Swinging. Are we talking the occasional secret affair, or a quiet arrangement with one or two other couples, or regular club attendance? And there is the social stigma attached to the swinging lifestyle; this stigma makes it harder to get actual numbers.

So... what do you all have to day? How many American couples actively swing on a fairly regular, honest, and open (at least, within their own group) basis?

 

[sr71plt]

It's all just speculation, isn't it? It's not a case of reliable forced declaration/registration. I don't know why folks think that reliable statistics can be obtained on everything. Guess they have a belief in it, which makes it almost a religion.

 

[CyranoJ]

Canadians also swing a lot; after all, the winter nights are six months long, and you have to do something, and the polar bears are getting scarce. The primary difference seems to be that Canadians are more polite. Except to the polar bears.

We are especially polite to the polar bears, except as far as preserving their habitat goes. We are polite to all bears. We are, after all, the nation that gave a major literary award to a bestiality romance about a bear which rather ironically would probably not be publishable on this site.

Swinging in Canada seems to be reasonably multi-ethnic, so far as I can tell from my narrow slice of anecdotal experience. Leastways I was never discernibly barred from that community by race as opposed to that I'm just not that into it, and the most explicit invitation I ever got was from a Korean girl and another Afro-Canadian dude.

 

[sr71plt]

Plus there's the need to keep warm nine months of the year.

 

[CyranoJ]

Meh, we have central heating for that.

Which is not say I've never tried to use "huddling for warmth" as an excuse. Just that it's never worked, more's the pity.

 

[Hypoxia]

Presumably, everybody lies about sex. Any individual confession about sexual activity must be taken with a gigagram of salt. People don't lie in their web searches, however, and Google has numbers about varying interests in various locales. Of course, an interest in swinging won't translate into action. So, how many USANians swing? The answer is 6.4%. I saw that number online so it must be true.

 

[slyc_willie]

I think an interesting distinction is, what, exactly, constitutes, "swinging?"

My understanding of the term is that of an open marriage; husband and wife can both easily seek out other partners for recreational or romantic reasons (although, usually it's on the recreational end of the scale). The term "swinging" brings to mind images of members-only clubs in which car keys (or room keys) are tossed into a bowl and whoever picks what from the bowl goes home to fuck whoever.

In that definition of the term, I would say that my wife and I are not swingers.

However, we have had girlfriends now and then. What works for us is that another woman finds my wife attractive, and I am introduced as a "third wheel" to the equation; not unwanted, but not required, either. My wife and I both prefer that the other woman be primarily interested in her, but not opposed to my presence. That's not to say I don't "give a good show," and in all cases thus far we have all been happy -- both sexually and emotionally -- with how things worked out.

But again, I wouldn't call my wife and I swingers. She doesn't want to have sex with other men, and I only want to have sex with other women when she is involved. In that sense, it is us making love with her.

I suppose, if I had to answer some national survey as to whether or not my wife and I were swingers, I would say "no." But if there was a write-in, I'd add, "but we do like to fuck other women now and then."

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Going by my experiences and what other therapists told me, extra-marital sex is common and usually leads to divorce. I saw more pussy and tits in therapy sessions than I ever saw in brothels I went to in Europe. Women, young and old, will expose themselves and initiate sex if the opportunity is there. I had women come in with their husbands, sit together across from me, and expose their pussies (hubby cant see but I could).

I have a test that seems to expose a woman's extra-marital interest. That is, sit close to her, with a clipboard and forms to sign, and place a hand on her knee. She'll jump or remain calm and friendly. The late psychiatrist Milton Erickson MD said that women interested in extra-marital sex sit in chairs different from other women. They tuck their legs under the chair and cross their feet at the ankles. I've seen it with patients and learned that they had sexual partners besides their husbands and boyfriends.

I suspect, in the past, plenty of women married gay men to conceal their respective sexual appetites AND incest was common.

 

[lovecraft68]

The human need to quantify everything, somethings are not cut and dried. Swinging is one of them, different things to different people.

MY take on it is couples with other couples is swinging, bringing in a "third" be they male or female doesn't constitute swinging to me. I have always equated it with couples.

I was the third person on a regular basis for an older couple years ago, but within my marriage the most my wife and I have ever done was a soft swing about five years ago with a couple from the west coast we met on lit who traveled to Boston and we met up there.

 

[SusanJillParker]

My personal experience with the swinging lifestyle is this.

Every swingers' social dance that I attended with my ex was crowded. The dance started at 8pm but most couples wouldn't file in until after 9pm. There were six dances held a year, each one with a different theme, black and white, Valentine's Day, Spring social, Halloween, Christmas, and, of course, New Years'.

The Halloween dance, my favorite, with half of all those in attendance dressed in costume, had 400 couples from all walks of life and all ages. What surprised me was how very young some of the swingers were. Many were in their early twenties. Most couples were in their 40's with some in their 50's and 60's.

House parties are another swinging phenomena. I didn't enjoy attending house parties as much as I enjoyed attending the social dances. House parties were more like orgies.

What I liked about the social dances was, at the end of the night, they opened a suite of four rooms where everything and anything went, gangbangs, anal sex, circle jerks, one-on-one for those who wanted to watch and be watched, and lesbian sex. Gay sex was always frowned upon at a swinger's gathering. Gay sex was more permissible at a house party.

Of course there are lots of whackos and weirdoes in attendance but I met lots of really nice people. Many of the swinging couples that I knew, especially the older ones, had solid marriages.

 

[Handley_Page]

For no discernible reason, I found myself researching swinging as a cultural phenomenon. The Wikipedia article seems to have a very positive, supporting attitude towards the concept of swinging; many advantages are listed, and the few disadvantages are contested within the article. Other websites, which I suspect were created by swinger advocates, also spoke positively of the lifestyle.

. . .

But the really difficult data point to pin down was the percentage of Americans who swing. Some articles suggested 1/10th of 1 percent; other articles suggested 50%. Wikipedia suggested 2 - 4 percent, and Psychology Today didn't address the issue at all.

I have a sneaking feeling that the statistical problem has arisen:
46.7% of statistics are made up. ?

 

[SusanJillParker]

Two to four percent sounds more like a realistic number to me. This is Puritanical America after all.

I'd never tell any of my non-swinging friends or relatives that I participated in the lifestyle for four years. They wouldn't understand. Many of them believed that all swingers were perverts when most of the people that I met were people just like you and me.

 

[Bramblethorn]

All comments with a big "in my experience" disclaimer:

Pretty much everything I found suggested that swingers were happier, healthier, and had longer - lived marriages than non swingers (I have excluded the data from Dr. Phil).

Excellent decision.

Interestingly, almost all swingers are white; and a statistically significant majority are both republican, and religious. It sorta paints Ted Cruz in a whole new light.

There are some complexities here.

Both "swinger" and "polyamorous" can be used for consensual non-monogamy. The two words don't have identical meanings but there's a lot of grey area that can be covered by either. "Polyamorous" tends to be associated with younger folk and more left-wing politics.

So I think some of that observation you mention comes down to "non-white/non-conservative people do this stuff too, but they're less likely to call it swinging".

There may also be issues of selection/non-response biases. Non-white people may be more cautious about discussing their sexuality (not without reason). And depending on how a researcher collects their data, they may not be surveying a representative sample in the first place (e.g. if a white person in a predominantly-white area surveys local swinger groups, you can expect those groups will be predominantly white). This sort of research is HARD.

So... what do you all have to day? How many American couples actively swing on a fairly regular, honest, and open (at least, within their own group) basis?

I have no idea what the percentages are, but I've been with my partner for almost 20 years and we've had a non-monogamous agreement for almost all of that time. Ours was the "extended relationships with a small number of other people" variety rather than "go to parties and play with strangers"; we both dated the same woman for about 5 years, and I've been involved with my sweetie for something like 13 years now, although long distance and other factors make that a very slow-moving relationship.

Going by my experiences and what other therapists told me, extra-marital sex is common and usually leads to divorce.

Pretty much by definition, therapists get a non-representative slice of human experience, geared towards dysfunction. People don't go to see a shrink when they're happy and healthy, and I suspect a lot of non-monogamous folk (certainly me) are wary about mentioning non-monogamy unless it's involved with the issues they need to deal with.

 

[SandraMustard]

For no discernible reason, I found myself researching swinging as a cultural phenomenon. The Wikipedia article seems to have a very positive, supporting attitude towards the concept of swinging; many advantages are listed, and the few disadvantages are contested within the article. Other websites, which I suspect were created by swinger advocates, also spoke positively of the lifestyle.

The best article I found was on Psychology Today. They made the point that swingers were young, old, short, tall, doctors, hairdressers, lawyers, car mechanics, and everything in between. Salaries range from $40,000 to $200,000, and the dispersion between blue collar and white collar professions is no different than that of the general population. In fact, there was no external characteristic that identified swingers, except for one thing: an open and flexible attitude towards sex.

Pretty much everything I found suggested that swingers were happier, healthier, and had longer - lived marriages than non swingers (I have excluded the data from Dr. Phil).

Interestingly, almost all swingers are white; and a statistically significant majority are both republican, and religious. It sorta paints Ted Cruz in a whole new light.

I found it interesting that most articles suggested that, while most women swingers identified themselves as bisexual or bi-curious, only a small percentile of male swingers did so; one article suggested that male bisexual or homosexual behavior was actively discouraged. Apparently men and women don't mind watching women go at it, but the same is not true of male/male encounters.

It's also true that different nations have different swing rates. Interestingly, Brits are the most randy of the lot; they swing so much that it's amazing that anyone gets to work on time. England really does swing like a pendulum do. Canadians also swing a lot; after all, the winter nights are six months long, and you have to do something, and the polar bears are getting scarce. The primary difference seems to be that Canadians are more polite. Except to the polar bears.

But the really difficult data point to pin down was the percentage of Americans who swing. Some articles suggested 1/10th of 1 percent; other articles suggested 50%. Wikipedia suggested 2 - 4 percent, and Psychology Today didn't address the issue at all.

Part of the issue seems to be what constitutes Swinging. Are we talking the occasional secret affair, or a quiet arrangement with one or two other couples, or regular club attendance? And there is the social stigma attached to the swinging lifestyle; this stigma makes it harder to get actual numbers.

So... what do you all have to day? How many American couples actively swing on a fairly regular, honest, and open (at least, within their own group) basis?

Nothing Chris called out from his references signifies swingers must be couples and both involved in sex with partners other than their significant other. I contend that a single individual can be a swinger. As I highlighted, it's about their attitude.

...
MY take on it is couples with other couples is swinging, bringing in a "third" be they male or female doesn't constitute swinging to me. I have always equated it with couples.
...

A couple exchanging partners with another couple is more strictly defined as 'swapping'. But not every couple is equal in exercising freedom. If two people are married or in a committed relationship, they must both accept and consent to the sexual freedom of their partner but don't have to participate at the same level.

A man who enjoys sharing his wife, or lets his wife pursue bi-sexual desires is still a swinger even when he doesn't want or get the same number of partners. A woman or man who has little interest in sex but acknowledges the needs of their spouse and allows them to play is not a swinger but has a swinger spouse.

If swingers are limited to couples, then threesomes and orgies are not swinging? I disagree. At a "swinger's party", I was spitroasted by two men, neither of them the spouse of the woman who was having sex with my husband right next to me. Was that not swinging?

Cheating is not swinging. If a SO doesn't know or approve, it's cheating. A true cuckold is not swinging but a submissive man who enjoys the humiliation or being deprived of sex with his (perhaps dominate) mate is a swinger.

In my opinion, attitude is the identifying factor. A single person can be a swinger if they approach sex as recreational instead of a series of monogamous relationships. People can start or stop being swingers at various times in their life. With a broad definition of 'swingers', the percentage is likely double-digit.

 

[49greg]

I don't know much about swinging, but I do remember an article on cheating that I read more than twenty years ago. Seems that someone was doing research on genetics back in 1945.

The procedure was to take blood samples from Mother and newborn in the hospital, possibly the delivery room. Then take a blood sample from the Husband. This was all well before DNA testing.

The study went on, and the results, whatever they were, of what the researcher was looking for where published. What was not published at that time was what was also found out.

Remember, pre DNA testing, so they only went by blood type. They found that 10% of the babies could NOT have been fathered by the Husband. Just by blood type, so those babies born to women who happened to be having an affair, or swinging, with men of the same blood type as the husband weren't detected.

The article said that those results weren't published until much later because at the time it was thought to be too shocking for the public to know. The article didn't mention whether the study was done on wives whose hubbys had been away at war, or women who's hubbys were currently living with them.

 

[legerdemer]

I don't know much about swinging, but I do remember an article on cheating that I read more than twenty years ago. Seems that someone was doing research on genetics back in 1945.

The procedure was to take blood samples from Mother and newborn in the hospital, possibly the delivery room. Then take a blood sample from the Husband. This was all well before DNA testing.

The study went on, and the results, whatever they were, of what the researcher was looking for where published. What was not published at that time was what was also found out.

Remember, pre DNA testing, so they only went by blood type. They found that 10% of the babies could NOT have been fathered by the Husband. Just by blood type, so those babies born to women who happened to be having an affair, or swinging, with men of the same blood type as the husband weren't detected.

The article said that those results weren't published until much later because at the time it was thought to be too shocking for the public to know. The article didn't mention whether the study was done on wives whose hubbys had been away at war, or women who's hubbys were currently living with them.

Not quite on topic of the OP, but related to this and sort of funny: in the lab part of microbiology courses all over the US, when I went to college, one of the labs demonstrating how antibodies work is doing a lab where students tested their own blood type and Rh factors. Almost every semester or year a student would go home with his or her results, talk to mom and dad about their blood type, and come up with a surprise. No micro classes do that with students' own blood anymore; they buy sheep's blood or similar from lab supply vendors.

 

[PayDay]

Too many.

 

[sr71plt]

If the reputed ratio of 101 males to every 100 females can be believed, slightly more than 50 percent are swingers--although some swing more than others.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Nothing Chris called out from his references signifies swingers must be couples and both involved in sex with partners other than their significant other. I contend that a single individual can be a swinger. As I highlighted, it's about their attitude.

A couple exchanging partners with another couple is more strictly defined as 'swapping'. But not every couple is equal in exercising freedom. If two people are married or in a committed relationship, they must both accept and consent to the sexual freedom of their partner but don't have to participate at the same level.

A man who enjoys sharing his wife, or lets his wife pursue bi-sexual desires is still a swinger even when he doesn't want or get the same number of partners. A woman or man who has little interest in sex but acknowledges the needs of their spouse and allows them to play is not a swinger but has a swinger spouse.

If swingers are limited to couples, then threesomes and orgies are not swinging? I disagree. At a "swinger's party", I was spitroasted by two men, neither of them the spouse of the woman who was having sex with my husband right next to me. Was that not swinging?

Cheating is not swinging. If a SO doesn't know or approve, it's cheating. A true cuckold is not swinging but a submissive man who enjoys the humiliation or being deprived of sex with his (perhaps dominate) mate is a swinger.

In my opinion, attitude is the identifying factor. A single person can be a swinger if they approach sex as recreational instead of a series of monogamous relationships. People can start or stop being swingers at various times in their life. With a broad definition of 'swingers', the percentage is likely double-digit.

Sandra, you raise a number of issues in the form of misconceptions held by people who have never participated in the lifestyle. There is no standard definition of "swinging." What is and what is not considered swinging varies greatly from one country to another, between cities and states, between generations, and even among members of the same club or community. Generally speaking, swinging involves couples but it is not limited exclusively to couples, and doesn't always involve swapping.

Couples who swap spouses are definitely swingers, but so are those who enjoy threesomes. It makes no sense to label the couple swingers but not the third party joining them, so those lucky single men and ladies should also be considered swingers. (The problem here is that although almost every swinging couple is open to adding a single bi female, there are not nearly enough to go around, while on the other hand, there are about 10X the supply of single males as are needed to meet the demand for their services. Do all those non-participating males get to call themselves swingers also?)

Even with swinging couples, the definitions are not clear. Couples who swap with other couples, of course, are swingers. But there are also various forms of "soft swapping" couples. There are couples who only engage in FF contact. There are couples who draw the line at oral sex. There are couples who don't have any contact at all with other couples, but instead engage in same room sex with their own partners. These couples also consider themselves to be swingers, although they don't fit the definition as discussed below.

I think an interesting distinction is, what, exactly, constitutes, "swinging?"

My understanding of the term is that of an open marriage; husband and wife can both easily seek out other partners for recreational or romantic reasons (although, usually it's on the recreational end of the scale). The term "swinging" brings to mind images of members-only clubs in which car keys (or room keys) are tossed into a bowl and whoever picks what from the bowl goes home to fuck whoever.

In that definition of the term, I would say that my wife and I are not swingers.

However, we have had girlfriends now and then. What works for us is that another woman finds my wife attractive, and I am introduced as a "third wheel" to the equation; not unwanted, but not required, either. My wife and I both prefer that the other woman be primarily interested in her, but not opposed to my presence. That's not to say I don't "give a good show," and in all cases thus far we have all been happy -- both sexually and emotionally -- with how things worked out.

But again, I wouldn't call my wife and I swingers. She doesn't want to have sex with other men, and I only want to have sex with other women when she is involved. In that sense, it is us making love with her.

I suppose, if I had to answer some national survey as to whether or not my wife and I were swingers, I would say "no." But if there was a write-in, I'd add, "but we do like to fuck other women now and then."

All the swingers we know are more selective than that. We have been to clubs and house parties, and never have we encountered a situation with a bowl and keys determining pairings. All the couples we know select their partners rather than rely on capricious randomness. What you are describing sounds like a 70s porn cliche that may or may not have been an urban myth. I'm not old enough to know.

In any event, we have been to parties where couples split up the moment they get inside the door and don't see each other again until it's time to leave. We have been to clubs where the husband and wife are required to stay together at all times. There is no single model that describes all situations and all participants.

 

[SandraMustard]

Sandra, you raise a number of issues in the form of misconceptions held by people who have never participated in the lifestyle. There is no standard definition of "swinging." What is and what is not considered swinging varies greatly from one country to another, between cities and states, between generations, and even among members of the same club or community. Generally speaking, swinging involves couples but it is not limited exclusively to couples, and doesn't always involve swapping.

Couples who swap spouses are definitely swingers, but so are those who enjoy threesomes. It makes no sense to label the couple swingers but not the third party joining them, so those lucky single men and ladies should also be considered swingers. (The problem here is that although almost every swinging couple is open to adding a single bi female, there are not nearly enough to go around, while on the other hand, there are about 10X the supply of single males as are needed to meet the demand for their services. Do all those non-participating males get to call themselves swingers also?)

Even with swinging couples, the definitions are not clear. Couples who swap with other couples, of course, are swingers. But there are also various forms of "soft swapping" couples. There are couples who only engage in FF contact. There are couples who draw the line at oral sex. There are couples who don't have any contact at all with other couples, but instead engage in same room sex with their own partners. These couples also consider themselves to be swingers, although they don't fit the definition as discussed below.




All the swingers we know are more selective than that. We have been to clubs and house parties, and never have we encountered a situation with a bowl and keys determining pairings. All the couples we know select their partners rather than rely on capricious randomness. What you are describing sounds like a 70s porn cliche that may or may not have been an urban myth. I'm not old enough to know.

In any event, we have been to parties where couples split up the moment they get inside the door and don't see each other again until it's time to leave. We have been to clubs where the husband and wife are required to stay together at all times. There is no single model that describes all situations and all participants.

Are we in agreement or disagreement? I said swinging is not JUST swapping partners at a party. All swappers are swingers but not all swingers are swappers. I think swinging is a lifestyle where a person is willing to have sex with another person outside the boundaries of their home relationship (if they have a home relationship, that is, a single person can be a swinger).

All of your scenarios involve swingers by my definition. If I came off as arguing they were not, I did not make myself clear. I was saying some of the things I've done would be unfairly labeled not swinging if swinging only involves full couple swapping. I consider solo sex with my masseur as swinging because my husband knows and permits it.

We are new to swinging, my first extra-marital sex was just a year ago and our first two-couple swap last September. Our first five-couple party was a month later and then about thirty couples at a New Year's Eve party. In the 'club' (really an informal group of swinger minded people), couples socialize and chose their matchups.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Are we in agreement or disagreement? I said swinging is not JUST swapping partners at a party. All swappers are swingers but not all swingers are swappers. I think swinging is a lifestyle where a person is willing to have sex with another person outside the boundaries of their home relationship (if they have a home relationship, that is, a single person can be a swinger).

All of your scenarios involve swingers by my definition. If I came off as arguing they were not, I did not make myself clear. I was saying some of the things I've done would be unfairly labeled not swinging if swinging only involves full couple swapping. I consider solo sex with my masseur as swinging because my husband knows and permits it.

We are new to swinging, my first extra-marital sex was just a year ago and our first two-couple swap last September. Our first five-couple party was a month later and then about thirty couples at a New Year's Eve party. In the 'club' (really an informal group of swinger minded people), couples socialize and chose their matchups.

We're definitely in agreement. I was using your post as a jumping off point to expand the conversation for the benefit of non-lifestylers. Also, I wanted to demonstrate the difficulty in quantifying participation due to the differences in operational definitions as demonstrated by various levels of involvement.

 

[Mister_Chris]

We are especially polite to the polar bears, except as far as preserving their habitat goes. We are polite to all bears. We are, after all, the nation that gave a major literary award to a bestiality romance about a bear which rather ironically would probably not be publishable on this site.

I will admit to having a very personal hatred of polar bears; a friend of mine was killed by one about 40 years ago. Many animals will kill a human if they are surprised, or feel threatened; but Polar Bears are the only animal I'm aware of that will deliberately hunt, track, and kill a human being. They are exceptionally intelligent, and have no fear of humans at all. About the only good thing about Global Warming is all the Polar Bears drowning.

But, that's just me. Most people probably don't share my feelings on this matter. I'm gonna have to check out that book review; I totally missed that. Thanks for pointing it out.

Any individual confession about sexual activity must be taken with a gigagram of salt.

Which would be in the vicinity of 1,100 tons of salt. And that's a whole lotta salt.

I think an interesting distinction is, what, exactly, constitutes, "swinging?"

For me, I would suggest that any time a third party becomes sexually intimate - with at least the knowledge, if not the participation - of both partners, that's swinging. But that's just my own personal take.

Both "swinger" and "polyamorous" can be used for consensual non-monogamy. The two words don't have identical meanings but there's a lot of grey area that can be covered by either. "Polyamorous" tends to be associated with younger folk and more left-wing politics.

I will admit, I had not encountered the term 'polyamorous' until now (and apparently, neither had my spell checker). In DuckDuckGo-ing it, the best distinction I can find is that swingers are more in it for the quick hit of sex and social interaction, while those in a polyamorous relationship are more closely involved in the day-by-day circumstances of life... sort of like building an ongoing marriage-type relationship, but with three people instead of two. The psych today article didn't distinguish between the two, but I got the impression that the author was describing swinging, rather than polyamory. So you might have a point there. BTW, I still like your Avatar. And, more generally, any woman wandering around with a boob hanging out. But I digress.

In my opinion, attitude is the identifying factor. A single person can be a swinger if they approach sex as recreational instead of a series of monogamous relationships. People can start or stop being swingers at various times in their life. With a broad definition of 'swingers', the percentage is likely double-digit.

I agree completely with attitude being the identifying factor. I'm surprised that the number is double digit; but perhaps, with the broad definition I described earlier in this post - anything beyond monogamy, with the knowledge of the partners - it could reach that much.

And if I liked Bramblethorns one boobed avatar, think how much I like yours.

 

[SandraMustard]

...

And if I liked Bramblethorns one boobed avatar, think how much I like yours.

Just a cartoon image excites you? What would you do to see the real flesh?

 

[Bramblethorn]

I will admit, I had not encountered the term 'polyamorous' until now (and apparently, neither had my spell checker). In DuckDuckGo-ing it, the best distinction I can find is that swingers are more in it for the quick hit of sex and social interaction, while those in a polyamorous relationship are more closely involved in the day-by-day circumstances of life... sort of like building an ongoing marriage-type relationship, but with three people instead of two.

That latter would be "polyfidelity", which is one particular type of polyamory, but by no means the only form.

My partner and I have an "ongoing marriage-type relationship" (shared house, finances, child-raising etc). My sweetie and I don't; we live a very long way apart, and while I've occasionally given them some financial support, that's been on a case-by-case basis. (They also have a live-in partner, who is not my partner.)

The snooty version you sometimes hear from the poly side is that swinging is just about sex and polyamory is about love. But in practice it's not so cut-and-dried; I hear it's not uncommon for self-styled "swingers" to end up with strong feelings for long-term partners, and there are quite a few "polyamorous" folk who are more interested in polyfuckery than romance.

So you might have a point there. BTW, I still like your Avatar. And, more generally, any woman wandering around with a boob hanging out. But I digress.

Thanks! I would not recommend romancing that particular lady, though, boob or no boob.

 

[slyc_willie]

All the swingers we know are more selective than that. We have been to clubs and house parties, and never have we encountered a situation with a bowl and keys determining pairings. All the couples we know select their partners rather than rely on capricious randomness. What you are describing sounds like a 70s porn cliche that may or may not have been an urban myth. I'm not old enough to know.

Nor am I. But what I was posting was an implied image, not an actuality. That said, several episodes of the HBO series Real Sex have included instances of exactly what I initially described.

In any event, we have been to parties where couples split up the moment they get inside the door and don't see each other again until it's time to leave. We have been to clubs where the husband and wife are required to stay together at all times. There is no single model that describes all situations and all participants.

This is pretty much what I consider swinging. Husband or wife solo, or husband and wife together, but the distinction I get about "swinging" is that both members of the relationship are available for whatever happens. I don't consider my wife and I having a girlfriend to be a form of swinging; we are inviting a third party to share our bed. My impression of swinging is more along the lines of couple A meets couple B, hubby from couple A fucks wifey from couple B and vice-versa. To me, swinging implies an equal exchange. If I take your wife to bed, you get to take my wife to bed, that sort of thing.