Straight people are weird. Here in Gay-World we just ask someone we are interested "Hi, wanna fuck?" or "Hi, my boyfriend and I want to fuck you, interested?"
But this ring thing: it sounds just perfect for Seattle's passive- aggressive- indecisive lifestyle.
" I'd love to take it off, but I just haven't seen it.""
Maaaybe... it's because the ring is black and difficult to see? Is it nighttime? That could be the problem.
Anyway, if we're talking about a clandestine signal to others of a similar persuasion/interest/revolutionary activity/etc. it would seem that one wouldn't want to, you know, broadcast what that signal was, lest Swinger-o-phobes grasp on to it and use it against you. Somehow.
My understanding is that swingers find like-minded people by going to venues where no one is surprised if you hit on them (swinger parties, hotel bars, nightclubs). Seems to work okay.
@1 has it exactly. People can pretend swinger's they don't exist or are rarer than they are because swinging is private at least and guardedly secret at most. Marriage is almost by definition public. When gays marry, they buy houses, mow the lawn, bring their kids to school, do all the same normal public stuff as other couples.
"Furthermore, Blumstein and Schwartz (1983) found that extra-marital sexual activity in younger females had increased and was becoming more comparable to that of males. In contrast, Choi, Catania, Dolcini (1994), and Forste and Tanfer (1996), found that less than 4% of all married people in their sample had engaged in extra-marital sex. Their findings seem to be skewed in relation to prior research, which suggests possible methodology flaws such as sample bias."
That statistic must be too low, plenty of other studies show higher rates of extra-marital sex. But extra-marital sex hardly equates with swinging.
How about the statistics on how many people who wear black rings are actually swingers, or how many people who wear black rings are even aware that their rings have been cursed with this new meaning?
Stop trying to ruin black rings for people who don't want to be propositioned by gross thumb-ring-disfigured swingers.
To the sexphobes out there, swingers absolutely *are* a despised minority. And they do talk about them. All the time. But to do so, they don't have to even mention words like "swinger" or "non-monogamy". The only words they need are "cheating", "faithful", and the like. They don't talk about "swingers", because they don't acknowledge that honest, cooperative non-monogamy is even a real thing! They're just cheaters, pure and simple. Simple like the sexphobes' tiny little minds.
I wonder if the statistics include all non-monogamous people who are in at least one opposite-sex relationship, such as polyamorous or open relationships? Which aren't the same thing as swingers.
That's why you see so many of them wearing "I'm a swinger, and I'm proud of it" T-Shirts, right?
But this ring thing: it sounds just perfect for Seattle's passive- aggressive- indecisive lifestyle.
http://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-conten…
Maaaybe... it's because the ring is black and difficult to see? Is it nighttime? That could be the problem.
Anyway, if we're talking about a clandestine signal to others of a similar persuasion/interest/revolutionary activity/etc. it would seem that one wouldn't want to, you know, broadcast what that signal was, lest Swinger-o-phobes grasp on to it and use it against you. Somehow.
My understanding is that swingers find like-minded people by going to venues where no one is surprised if you hit on them (swinger parties, hotel bars, nightclubs). Seems to work okay.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/att…
"Furthermore, Blumstein and Schwartz (1983) found that extra-marital sexual activity in younger females had increased and was becoming more comparable to that of males. In contrast, Choi, Catania, Dolcini (1994), and Forste and Tanfer (1996), found that less than 4% of all married people in their sample had engaged in extra-marital sex. Their findings seem to be skewed in relation to prior research, which suggests possible methodology flaws such as sample bias."
That statistic must be too low, plenty of other studies show higher rates of extra-marital sex. But extra-marital sex hardly equates with swinging.
How about the statistics on how many people who wear black rings are actually swingers, or how many people who wear black rings are even aware that their rings have been cursed with this new meaning?
Stop trying to ruin black rings for people who don't want to be propositioned by gross thumb-ring-disfigured swingers.
You're welcome.