Polyamorous vs Swingers

J

Jens1968

New member
Being relatively new to polyamory, I have a hard time accepting that many full-blown swingers describe themselves as polyamorous. I have known a few swingers, and all of them say that they would not feel comfortable living in a "real" polyamorous relationship. Seems to me that they are only "in it" for the sex.

How do you see this issue?
 
I don't see it as an issue, because I don't consider it my business how other people identify themselves, even if I don't agree with their self-identification.

That said, polyamory does not necessarily equal sex with multiple partners. To me, polyamory involves emotions beyond sexual attraction, and there are those on this board who don't even have sex with some or all of their romantic partners. Whereas to me, swinging is intended as sex with multiple partners without emotional attachment.

Those are *my* definitions, and others might have other opinions.

I have also known people who are both swingers and polyamorous; they have no-strings, non-committed sex with multiple partners but also have or want to have love/romantic attachments to more than one person. The two are not mutually exclusive, nor are they mutually inclusive.
 
I find it all very confusing myself. I guess that's why I don't like labels per se. I can't even figure out what 'category' to place myself in half the time, lol.

Since I have started perusing the forums about various lifestyles I have discovered so many new terms for this, that and the other thing, that I am now more confused than ever! :eek:
 
Jens1968 said:
Being relatively new to polyamory, I have a hard time accepting that many full-blown swingers describe themselves as polyamorous.
Click to expand...

'Swinger' (in this context) generally refers to a couple (married or just coupled) who have casual sexual relations with people outside of the established couple. These outside relations are notably 'sex only' and emotional enmeshment is typically avoided or forbidden.

'Polyamory' generally refers to the relationship arrangement in which multiple romantic and emotionally-connected relationships exist (or can exist) simultaneously, with all parties being aware of the other relationships.

While these two paths are very different to me, it seems likely that they look similar from the outside. I hope that people using these terms interchangeably is related to ignorance and not just because they like giving words new meanings.
 
Something to keep in mind is that we don't live in an "either/or" world, even if we like to pretend we do. Some people are poly. Some people are not. But just because someone is, or isn't, doesn't mean they aren't something else ALSO. Some people are poly and swingers.

I don't happen to identify that way, but I know people who do, and whom it makes sense for.

Example: I am poly. My husband and I have a poly relationship, meaning we agree to having other loves. But previously we had a mono relationship. I was still polyamorous; I just wasn't living polyamorously.

Additionally, we have had casual sexual experiences with other people. These were not polyamorous situations, but they don't change the fact that we are polyamorous.

Currently, I have a husband and a boyfriend. We have a poly Vee. But if, for example, my bf and I opted to participate in a swinger group, that wouldn't change the reality that we are part of a poly V.

Make sense?

A person can be poly and be a lot of other things:
Poly and bisexual.
Poly and straight.
Poly and gay.
Poly and a swinger.
Poly and a geek.
Poly and an intellectual.
Poly and a crochet queen.
Poly and a drag king.
Poly and a biker.
Poly and...
 
It only bother me in the way that swingers claiming to be polyamorous gives people a negative view of what polyamory is. I find myself consistently explaining the difference. Even Sam was very hesitant for a couple years because he thought I was just some swinger looking to get laid, when he wanted a girlfriend.
 
Everyone interprets labels slightly differently.

To me, "swinging" implies casual sex as a couple. I DON'T consider myself a swinger.

To me, "open" implies casual sex as an individual. I DO consider myself open.

To me, "polyamory" implies emotional involvement with more than one person, with everyone's knowledge and consent. I DO consider myself polyamorous.

So, I describe my current relationship config as "an open poly Vee-plus." I have a husband, a live-in long-term boyfriend, a girlfriend that we share to various degrees, and several FWBs... and I am open to sexual encounters with others that I am not interested in pursuing an emotional relationship with (such as my girlfriend's husband).
 
Swing and poly are two different things. It they're conflated, then that's a misconception.

However, Chess and baseball are also two different things. They shouldn't be conflated, and yet, a baseball player can also be a Chess player. They just have to play the two games separately.

Swing and poly don't (in principle) intersect by way of similarity -- but they can intersect by way of sharing space in a person's life. For instance, let's say you have a triad -- three romantically connected and emotionally committed adults -- two bisexual men and one heterosexual woman just for argument's sake. They're handfasted, live together, and intend to stay together for life. Obviously, they're polyamorous (as a three-person unit).

However, let's say that one of the activities they like to do together (as a triad) is to visit a swing club together. At the swing club, they have casual random NSA sex with strangers (or acquaintances). No one falls in love (outside their triad), but all three polyamorous adults are engaging in a swing activity. They're swingers who also happen to be polyamorous. Swing and polyamory are two different things, yet it's possible for a person to engage in both (separately and/or distinctly).

Does that make sense? Their swinging activities and their triad relationship are essentially two different things. They are distinct even though they can overlap. Their polyamorous relationship persists with each other even while they are having casual sex outside their triad. In a case like that, it would be correct for them to say they're both swingers and polyamorists. Just as any person can be both a baseball player and a Chess player.

Now, could hypotheticals be concocted that would make the distinction between swing and poly less clear? Probably. Could a slider be set up between extreme poly and extreme swing? Probably. But at the extremes, we'd still have the basic principle that poly is about romance, whereas swing is just about sex. We can still talk about poly and swing in a way that recognizes the difference between the two.

My two pesos,
Kevin T.
 
The reason people usually have a problem with swingers is because they don't want to be mistaken for someone who has sex outside the confines of a relationship or a potential relationship, at least. If you don't want casual sexual relationships, say so. You don't need to build up this resentment of swingers in order to be poly. You be poly by having multiple loving relationships.
 
How do you see this issue?
Click to expand...

I see it as a vocab use thing more than anything.

It's not an issue for me. I think people are all different and can be how they want to be.

I also think it sure makes being X and communicating with others a lot easier when people take the time to calibrate/clarify their vocab use when talking to each other.

"Chips" in the US are different than in England. ;)

To me, in the briefest way I can make it,

  • monosexual -- desire or capacity to share sex with one partner
  • polysexual -- desire or capacity to share sex with more than one partner

  • monoamorous -- desire or capacity to share love with one partner
  • polyamorous -- desire or capacity to share love with with more than one partners.

  • Monogamous -- desire or capacity for relationship structure with one other partner only
  • Non-monogamous -- desire or capacity for relationship structure with more than one partner. There can be many open relationship models.
    • Swinging -- a type of open non-monogamous relationship model. Partners in a committed relationship engage in (casual, no strings attached sex share) with other people for recreation/socializing.
There can be some honest, ethical swingers who are monoamorous and polysexual. They want to love the one partner, but enjoy recreational sex with several partners.

There can be some honest, ethical swingers who are polyamorous and polysexual. They love many partners, and also enjoy recreational sex with several partners.

There can be some honest, ethical "not sure, questioning, experimenting, exploring" people trying new stuff on.

There can be some less than honest/ethical swingers:

  • People not really into it, but going along for their partner's sake, are on one side of the spectrum. They are hurting themselves doing that.
  • People who are predators are on the other end of the spectrum. They hurt others.

There's nothing wrong with honest/ethical behavior (exploring, swinging or polyamory), but we could remember that all people are different.

It's not just either/or toggles at play here, like "either polyamorous or swinging."

It could be either/or/both/neither/some/none, depending on the person.

Hope that makes sense,
Galagirl
 
Last edited:
You can be both. You can be one or the other. It's all non-monogamy.

Then there are the zealots on either side who believe you can't be both. It's all about love, and all about fucking. I can't relate to this side since it is far too black and white and doesn't apply to me at all.

Polyamory, for me, is simply loving more than one. Swingers can, in fact, love more than one, and sometimes do.

I find it an extremely simple set of definitions, and I don't find them exclusive of each other.

I kind of fit into the "I can be both" category. I haven't practiced any form of swinging in a few years, but it definitely doesn't mean it won't happen again.
 
Last edited:
Inyourendo said:
It only bother me in the way that swingers claiming to be polyamorous gives people a negative view of what polyamory is. I find myself consistently explaining the difference. Even Sam was very hesitant for a couple years because he thought I was just some swinger looking to get laid, when he wanted a girlfriend.
Click to expand...

Exactly! This is what I am talking about. This is what worries me about coming out as a polyamorous person. A lot of people think that it equals swinging.

I guess I will have to grow some hair on my chest, and just not care. :cool:
 
Jens1968 said:
Exactly! This is what I am talking about. This is what worries me about coming out as a polyamorous person. A lot of people think that it equals swinging.

Guess I will have to grow some hairs on my chest, and just not care. :cool:
Click to expand...

The other option is to clearly define to them what it means to you. Change how it is perceived into loving more than one, is more important than fucking more than one.
 
Originally Posted by Inyourendo
It only bothers me in the way that swingers claiming to be polyamorous gives people a negative view of what polyamory is. I find myself consistently explaining the difference. Even Sam was very hesitant for a couple years because he thought I was just some swinger looking to get laid, when he wanted a girlfriend.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone view a swinger negatively? Oh, right, because they have sex outside of the purity of a loving relationship.

It seems that changing one's attitude about sex, especially the sex other people have, would stop any negative judgement. Then, nobody would looked down upon for their consensual relationship style.

What is so bad about swinging that it "worries" you to be mistaken for a swinger? What is so bad about having casual, NSA sex?

I'm a mixed race (black Caribbean and white) and live in an area with many Turkish and Algerian people. People often assume that I'm from one of those countries, or Muslim. Imagine if I said I'm "worried" about being thought of as one of them, because it gives people a negative view of people who have the same ethnic background as me. That directly implies that being "one of them" is a bad thing.
 
Because I'm not a swinger. I don't have casual sex. I don't want people making those assumptions about me. Why would I want someone thinking I'm something I'm not? If you like casual sex, and have 30 lovers a year, fine. But why would I, someone who hadn't had another lover in over 2 years, want to be lumped in with them?
 
Because im not a Turk or Algerian. I don't worship Allah. I don't want people making those assumptions about me. Why would I want someone thinking I'm something I'm not? If you are Algerian or Turkish and worship Allah, fine. But why would I, someone who isn't Algerian, Turkish or Muslim want to be lumped in with them?
Click to expand...

"I don't know. Why would you? I certainly wouldn't," replied Donald Sterling.
 
Last edited:
So when I correct people and them that I'm Haitian, and not Jamaican or African American, am I directly implying that being Jamaican or African American is a bad thing? I don't like being mistaken for Jamaican or African American, not in the least. I could marry a Jamaican or African American tomorrow and it wouldn't change that sentiment. Being proud of my heritage or lifestyle choices doesn't mean that I dislike or am intolerant of other's heritage or lifestyle choice. Loving myself doesn't mean that I hate you.

I'm dating an ex-swinger. I don't really care if he continues to swing, but if he or anyone else are to identify our relationship as an extension of his swinging, I'd dislike it. I don't really feel that it's my job to educate people who don't really care to know the differences between swinging and polyamory, though.
 
You can correct someone without making judgemental statements. When someone mistakes me for being Turkish, Algerian or Muslim, I can correct them without feeling I've been negatively judged for their assumption. Being Turkish, Algerian or Muslim isn't a bad thing, I'm simply not any of those things. I don't feel I'm being "lumped in" with them because I don't view them as a negative demographic to begin with. Someone just saw me in an area with many of those folk, saw I have a similar complexion to those folk and probably even saw that I frequent the same places as those folk. They made a mistake. They didn't mistake me for a terrorist. I'd be angry at that because not all Algerians, Turks or Muslims are terrorists. Being a terrorist is a bad thing.

The equivalent would be if someone thought that because I'm a swinger (which would be a mistake), I'm a cheater. I wouldn't protest at being mislabelled as a swinger but I would protest at the implication that I (and all swingers) are cheaters.
 
Jens1968 said:
Exactly, this is what I am talking about. This is what worries me about coming out as a polyamorous person. A lot of people think that it equals swinging.

I guess I will have to grow some hair on my chest, and just not care.
Click to expand...

Until very recently, polyamory had very little overt presence in common conversation or media/entertainment. There has been, however, a huge explosion of the swinging "lifestyle," movies, well-known clubs (not anymore), etc., for quite some time in the US (since the late '60s, I want to say). Polyamory has been around for a while, but it takes public opinion an incredibly long time to change its view on tradition.

So, people do know what swinging is (more or less) and easily mistake anything outside of traditional monogamy as such. It's just the nature of how the unwashed masses think.

Either grow beyond having an opinion about people's misconceptions about your worldview, or offer accurate information when the opportunity presents itself. I personally don't care for being mistaken as a swinger, and will let people know that they are in fact different from my own views/practices.

ICanBeStunning said:
So when I correct people and them that I'm Haitian and not Jamaican or African American, am I directly implying that being Jamaican or African American is a bad thing? I don't like being mistaken for Jamaican/African American, not in the least.
Click to expand...

Looks like someone threw a red herring into the room. You are obviously correct, ICanBeStunning, identifying myself as having one worldview (or whatever) instead of another states my preference and clarifies my stance... it does not damn any different views.
 
What Marcus said.

The reality of the situation is that most people are poorly educated about what swing and poly are. (Plenty of people have never even heard of one or both of the two.) I don't know of any quick or easy way to fix that reality, therefore I accept explaining the difference between swing and poly as "doing my part" to help get people better educated. We can only do it a little at a time. Hopefully the process will pick up steam in a generation or two.

But I agree with london when she says that there's nothing wrong with being a swinger per se, and I wouldn't feel hurt, bothered, or offended if someone told me, "Oh, you're polyamorous; so, that means you go to swing clubs and stuff?" I'd probably just chuckle and say, "Naw, swing and poly are two different things -- two different kinds of non-monogamy. Swing is generally just about having casual sex, whereas polyamory is about having romantic, emotionally-committed relationships with multiple people." Sure it takes me a few mouthfuls to impart that information to my misinformed friend, but I don't mind since it's for a good cause and now there's one more person in the world who understands some of the terminology.

That's how I feel about it anyway.

And let's say I tell someone I'm polyamorous and they say, "Oh, another swinger. Aren't you ashamed that you cheat on your wife?" Well, then I guess I'd have to step backwards and say, "Whoah; swingers aren't necessarily cheaters; it depends on whether all the adults involved in the situation have full knowledge about it and consent to it." No point attempting the more advanced lesson of the finer points between what swing and poly are. The person I'm talking to, for now, just needs to process/digest the essence of responsible non-monogamy. We can talk about the specific types of non-monogamy later, if/when it comes up.

Still nothing for me to lose any sleep over. It's a primitive world, not nearly as enlightened as I hope it will be come Y3K. Ignorance and prejudice is something swingers and polyamorists alike have to confront and deal with. Sure it sucks but we might as well roll up our sleeves and get to work on it. If we don't do it, who will?

Again, nothing wrong with educating the public one person at a time. If I can have a conversation with someone, and they leave that conversation with a better understanding about non-monogamy than they had before they talked to me, then I've done a good deed and feel good about it. And if they decide they want to cling to their bigotry despite my attempts to enlighten them? I still give myself credit for having tried, and have faith that someone I talk to in the future will be more receptive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top