It’s Not A Panacea For Depression. It’s Just Swinging.
|
Posted:Jul 28, 2014 2:51 pm
Last Updated:Aug 1, 2015 8:29 am
29966 Views
|
A press release – a statement issued by an organization with a specific agenda – is not an objective news story. The late New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan put it best, in another context: “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
For folks who want to participate in the lifestyle, swinging can be a wonderful activity. It can be social, it can be pleasurable, it can be funny. It can also be sad, alienating, and hurtful. In short, it’s like most other activities, except with more lubricant and latex.
But I strongly question the claims made by a network for swingers I’m not going to name here (guidelines and all) about swinging’s health benefits. According to this organization’s press release, “sex and swinging is regarded as an instant cure for mild depression” and “[t]here are plenty of health benefits to leading a sexually active lifestyle, and joining a swingers club, connecting on social networks to meet other swingers with common interests can improve health.”
This is a stretch, by any measure. Yes, sex is an aerobic activity. And done certain ways, it can burn a few calories and get one’s heart rate up. But that’s inherent to sex, not to swinging. If someone is mildly – or even more profoundly – depressed, sex may provide a very temporary endorphin rush. (And, of course, people with certain medical conditions, such as cardiac worries, should be careful when it comes to sex.)
The press release continues: “Through the release of endorphins, swingers members struggling through a depressing period are treated to a sense of euphoria, leaving them satisfied and in a state of ecstasy. It is a sense of freedom and change in lifestyle that cures the depression, as swinging provides the chance to be open and fulfill desires without diminishing trust.”
Yowza! If a quick roll in the hay were all it took to alleviate depression, mental health clinics would be sponsoring tours to the legal Nevada brothels. This incredibly misinformed statement doesn’t take into account that sex won’t address the underlying causes of depression, whether organic (brain chemistry) or environmental (life circumstances). And using the word “cure” anywhere in this press release is downright irresponsible. “Cures the depression”? Swinging will do no such thing.
Y’see, swinging is a social activity, and someone who is depressed is not necessarily going to function well in social settings. Going into a swinging situation may set up a depressed person or more failure – quite frankly, it’s hard to be at one’s best (or even moderately good) when depressed. In this light, swinging may actually do more damage than healing to a depressed person.
Furthermore, advocating that depressed people swing is not healthy to other participants. Swingers aren’t there to be therapists or marriage counselors, which is why smart swingers run, instead of walking, when they hear someone say “We started swinging to work on our relationship.” Simply put, swingers don’t want your drama.
There’s another factor: A depressed person is more likely to take risks, such as having unsafe sex or engaging in behavior (drug and alcohol use, questionable meeting-up protocol) which will place him/her in danger. One would be lucky to emerge from such a situation depressed. But if one is unlucky…
For joyful people, swinging can be a continuation of their joyful life. But putting the additional, unrealistic burden of expecting swinging to turn emotional lead into emotional gold is downright unfair – both to the depressed individual and the swinging community at large.
|
|
|
8
Comments
|
|
Sometimes You Cherchez La Femme, Sometimes La Femme Cherchez You (Quotes From Women On Sex)
|
Posted:Jul 26, 2014 6:00 pm
Last Updated:May 10, 2016 7:00 am
30080 Views
|
Ever fall over just the right book? While at the library today, “Women’s Wicked Wisdom”, a collection of quotes assembled by Michelle Lavric, jumped off the shelves and into my hand.
The whole book features quotes from women on a variety of subjects – I could have just as easily culled items for a food blog – but I’ve pulled out a baker’s dozen which offer wit and insight on women’s pleasure, sexuality, and even – if one squints a bit – swinging. My personal favorite is from Diane Nichols… because who doesn’t fear that?
Enjoy… and if so moved, add a few.
1. “It is not possible to have only one man. Deep in my heart, I change.” Brigitte Bardot
2. “If we weren’t meant to have sex, He wouldn’t have given us the dangly bits that get us turned on.” – Edwina Currie
3. “If you’re looking for monogamy, you’d better marry a swan.” – Nora Ephron
4. “Real gratification is not enshrined in a tiny cluster of nerves but in the sexual involvement of the whole person.” – Germaine Greer
5. “Never, ever, go to bed with a man on the first date. Not ever. Unless you really want to.” – Cynthia Heimel
6. “Never regret. If it’s good, it’s wonderful. If it’s bad, it’s experience.” – Victoria Holt
7. “If sex is such a natural phenomenon, how come there are so many books on how to?” – Bette Midler
8. “Just remember what you have learned in the sexual techniques book you read: foreplay, foreplay, foreplay… in the right location, location, location.” – “Mom”, the agony aunt for TartCity
9. “I could never be comfortable at an orgy. I’d always think there would be someone making rabbit ears behind my back.” – Diane Nichols
10. “The fact that good people and bad people have orgasms should tell you God has a sense of irony.” – Susan Sarandon
11. “If sex is so personal, why are we expected to share it with someone else?” – Lily Tomlin
12. “The young always think that they invented sex and somehow hold full literary rights on the subject.” – Mary Wesley
13. “Sex and I have a lot in common. I don’t want to take any credit for inventing it – but I must say, in my own modest way, and in a manner of speaking – that I have rediscovered it!” – Mae West
|
|
|
10
Comments
|
|
Why Swingers Won’t Be Joining The Mile-High Club in Denver
|
Posted:Jul 24, 2014 1:06 pm
Last Updated:Nov 8, 2017 9:43 am
29009 Views
|
Do folks just not like sex in Denver? After going through phases as a self-described “women’s bar for everyone” (one which featured vegan and vegetarian food options), several other restaurant concepts (including the perhaps-aptly named “Swallows”), and even, decades ago, a church, a swingers’ club located at 3090 Downing Street has closed its doors for good.
The space’s most recent incarnation, an off-premises play swing club called 3090 Eden, opened its doors on Mardi Gras this year – March 4, for those keeping score. Now, I have a soft spot in my heart for any club that opens on Mardi Gras, even if it’s not in New Orleans. Alas, the good times will not roll any longer: The club closed earlier this month, according to Denver Westword, which has covered the location’s various incarnations for several years.
Club impresario James Riggs attributes a lack of community support to the club’s closing. But don’t blame Denver swingers for seeming apathy: 3090 Eden was an off-site club, meaning that swingers could drink and socialize, but when they were ready to pair off (or whatever verb is appropriate to the number of people involved) and play, they had to go elsewhere.
This situation is fairly common in the swing club community. Quite often – although not always – you can have swinging, or you can have a license to sell liquor. Clubs that have both are rare birds, which is why many are BYOB. In this case, 3090 had the liquor license… which meant that swingers had to find other venues in which to play.
This type of arrangement removes the spur-of-the-moment sex of swing parties – and this is doubly a consideration in areas that depend on customers using their cars to get to ‘em. Hopping into bed with someone when condoms are involved is one thing: Getting into a car when one’s partner has had a few drinks at a club is entirely another. And when one leaves an off-premises club, one effectively surrenders the protection club owners and workers in an on-site club give.
It doesn’t seem as though the Mile High City has been especially hospitable to swing clubs. According to Denver Westword, which covered the various incarnations of 3090 Eden in a series of articles, Sugar House, The Scarlet Ranch, two other swing clubs, closed after enduring a series of raids and building-code issues.
Side note: Denver Westword’s coverage of 3090 Eden is worth pulling up if only to see the picture of Sugar House owner Scottie Ewing, in which he looks like Ming the Merciless wearing an Adidas track jacket.
|
|
|
5
Comments
|
|
Upcoming Broadway Play To Showcase “Qualms” About Swinging
|
Posted:Jul 22, 2014 11:35 am
Last Updated:May 26, 2015 1:12 pm
28271 Views
|
This is neither a review nor an endorsement of a play scheduled to debut on New York’s Great White Way in spring 2015. First, there are rules against endorsements. Second, I didn’t see the play during its recent Chicago run and have no way of knowing its quality.
But I am intrigued by “The Qualms”, a new work from Pulitzer Prize winner Bruce Norris, if only because the cast featured in the Chicago run was not commercially pretty. Judging purely from publicity photos, the actors ranges from chubby to cut, with cute sprinkled around all the entire. (Note: That was “cast members” and not “cast’s members.” There is, apparently, very little actual nudity in the pay. This ain’t no “Oh, Calcutta.”)
Not having read the play itself, I don’t know whether some of the casting choices were mandated by the author. But it is nice to see people who look like the majority of folks one legitimately might encounter at a hotel party depicted. At least in Chicago, the cast wasn’t made up of the oh-so-pretty people of the 2008 CBS-TV show “Swingtown.” (Fun little bit of synchronicity: “The Qualms” is set in California, according to notes from the Chicago production. The Swingtown TV show, which was set in Chicago, was primarily filmed in California.)
Showing Hollywood-level pretty people swinging has long been one of my complaints about how the lifestyle is depicted in the media. It rivals my irritation with the vast number of affordable mega-apartment supposedly located in the heart of New York City. A swingers’ event where everyone looks like Swingtown stars Molly Parker or Jack Davenport is going to make non-swingers think this activity is out of their league.
My own experience has been that the people with the best attitudes – playful or brassy or good-natured – have the most fun when swinging. By the published accounts, “The Qualms” reflects this. Reviews of the Chicago production indicate the dialog is fairly witty. What the play doesn’t offer in skin it makes up for in smart.
The play’s dialog, which apparently substitutes for action, moves from swinging and sexuality to a variety of challenging topics, such as the Gulf War and pregnancy. Is this realistic? Perhaps not in hotel parties where relative strangers get together, but for gatherings where couples assemble on a regular basis (as is the case with the play) it’s not unlikely. I’ll personally vouch for and grandkids, job woes, medical conditions and used-car sales being perfectly acceptable topics at one of the more relaxed clubs I frequented around a decade ago.
I’ll even go as far as to say the nature of swinging itself was fair game in real life, much as it apparently is in the play, although most conversations I was party to took a fairly cavalier tone to the topic: Folks were happy to acknowledge the Joy of Swinging, but didn’t feel the need to dwell on it, as they had far more interesting distractions at hand.
But this is a small nitpick, and one unfair to superimpose on the theater. By definition, a staged event such as a play has to take on a certain un-naturalness: Most real-time dialog is, quite frankly, banal and boring. It certainly doesn’t hew to the rules of well-scripted play writing.
So… no review here. For all I know the play could prove massively irritating, or just flat-out suck. But I’ve crossed finger or two that the chosen actors and actresses will look like real people – the more swinging is depicted as something real people do, the faster, maybe, more will.
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Seeking Clicks, A News Site Hitches An Unrelated Government Screw-Up To The Swinging Community
|
Posted:Jul 20, 2014 12:32 pm
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2014 8:59 am
26892 Views
|
There’s an old joke about a traveler who stops in at a bar. The bartender gives him a beer, but warns the traveler not to talk to an old man who’s sitting at the end of the bar.
“That’s the angriest man in town,” cautions the bartender.
Well, the traveler is intrigued, so he goes over to the old man “Hey, old timer,” the traveler says. “I’ll buy you a drink if you tell me why you’re the angriest man in town.”
The old man stares at the traveler and says “, it’s like this. I’m the village handyman. If you look out the window, you’ll see a barn. I built that barn, and a dozen more like it in this town. But do people call me Darrin the barn builder? No!
The old man continues. “And if you came to this bar from the north, you probably walked over a stone bridge. I built that bridge, and three more like it besides. But do people call me Darrin the bridge maker? No!
“But let me tell you, , fuck just ONE goat…”
This joke came to mind when I read an article on Inquisitr dot com (yeah, that’s spelled correctly). Seems the federal government is housing Central American who have illegally crossed into the United States in a hotel near Buffalo, NY.
Leave aside the immigration issue, which has been hashed over in numerous other forums (and which doesn’t need to be debated here). The Inquisitr couldn’t resist slapping the following title on its article: “Feds Scout ‘Swinger’s Convention’ Hotel To House Illegal Immigrant , Already Fully Booked”.
First off, huh? That’s a mouthful of a headline. Even after two or three reads, it’s still fairly unclear. One might surmise that the the article will be about a bunch of young ‘uns being put in the same place where top- and bottomless swingers are busily dashing from room to room while waving dildos and cans of flavored lube above their heads.
One would be wrong. This article, which was published in late June 2014, “was previously home to the “Entice the Falls” couple’s swingers convention in 2009.” Wait – that was five years ago. Surely the hotel has scrubbed the stains out of the carpeted staircases, and chlorine-dosed the pools where those naughty, naughty swingers frolicked…. half a decade ago.
Second, the news of the story is that the feds decided to put the there in 2014… but didn’t bother to tell hotel management, and when the showed up, the hotel was fully booked. Now, that’s a news story – it’s an “oopsie” of pretty big proportions. And it doesn’t need irrelevant embellishment.
The only reason why a five-year-old swingers’ event mentioned once, midway down the piece, might be considered fair game to be mentioned in a headline is if there was a big stink about it five years ago when the convention was held. Under those circumstances, the hotel’s name would have acquired a certain degree of notoriety in the community the Inquisitr serves. But that’s a pretty flimsy ploy, especially since the hotel was recently renamed, according to the article.
But there was only one phrase in the article devoted to the swingers’ convention. It was in no way, shape, or form central to the issue. Furthermore, linking a government screw-up involving to a swingers’ convention – where, assumedly, were NOT welcome – is dirty pool. Most clubs and conventions are pretty careful when it comes to checking identification, and doubly so when alcohol is going to be served.
Fair’s fair: Inquisitr wants clicks as much as any other website. It’s a lot more fun to read about sex than it is to read about an illegal immigration crisis. But pegging a five-year-old swinging event to a current government issue in a headline is a real reach. Despite the snickering tone of the headline, it isn’t the swingers who should be ashamed of this.
(I’d love to publish a direct link to the piece, but blog guidelines prohibit doing so. The article is eminently Googleable for anyone who wants to bump the views count up, but be forewarned – it’s a yawner.)
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
Swinger Resort Article Promises "Everything", Delivers The Superficial
|
Posted:Jul 18, 2014 3:44 pm
Last Updated:Nov 8, 2017 9:53 am
27409 Views
|
I’ll be the first to applaud any good press the swinging community gets, but sometimes even the best-intended articles miss the mark. Sadly, the expectations set by the title of a recent Huffington Post travel piece, “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Swingers Resorts”, aren’t met by the content within.
(Note: Per AdultFriendFinder guidelines, I can’t post a hotlink to the article. It appeared on June 18, 2014 in The Huffington Post.)
The piece’s tone ping-pongs between wide-eyed observer and knowing insider, with not enough of the latter to really answer all the questions someone who has never been to such a resort might have. It opens with some (very) general definitions about swingers and swinging, which for a mass-market audience are often frustratingly scant on definitions -- a vanilla audience probably needs “soft swap” defined for it.
Personally, I can do without the “can you imagine what people do?!” tone a lot of articles on swinging carry, but there’s damned little we can do about it – until the lifestyle launches its own publicity machine.
The article’s biggest flaw is that all of the supposed insider information reads as though it was gleaned by studying a few online brochures. (One has to cover up for meals, which has more to do with hygiene and food licenses than surrendering one’s freedoms; single males at swingers resorts, much like elsewhere in the swinging community, are at the bottom of the barrel, and some resorts offer, uh, lawn chess.)
The story does go into some of the very basic etiquette, such as most resorts not being free-for-all fuck zones.
And it does offer a hint at the non-sex activities, although for a piece that promises everything one might want to know, a little more information would be welcome. Do any of the events offer specific activities that might help break the ice? Are there options to take meals at communal tables – an amenity which is surprisingly effective at helping folks start talking? How, exactly, does one invite an interested party to a play area? And yes, experienced swingers will have answers to that last question – but articles on swinger resorts aren’t written for experienced swingers.
The piece’s biggest flaw is when it tries to answer the question “Are there any rules?” The answer, according to the author, is “No cameras, no cell phones, and no sex anywhere you could be seen by someone not on the resort's grounds. That's about it.”
Whoa! Those seeking evidence that this article was written by someone who has no insider knowledge of the swinging community need read no further. That flip little comment ignores two of the biggest rules of swinging: “No means no” and “condoms when any of the participants request ‘em.” Absent this little detail, a newbie swinger (or couple) could very easily be put off by the whole idea. And while not an absolute, I’d add the following: At swinger events, clubs, and resorts, women rule. A male who steps out of line will quickly find himself escorted off the premises – a damned daunting concept when “the premises” are Caribbean islands in barracuda-infested waters.
There’s more, of course: A few notes about avoiding couples drama (one’s own and others) would have been helpful. Even a quick gloss about questions to ask each other, and how to leave the drama at home, would be of use to readers considering exploring swingers’ resorts. But again, these are the considerations that wouldn’t occur to someone who hadn’t been involved with the swinging community – and such a person needs to do a bit more research before promising to tell “everything”.
|
|
|
3
Comments
|
|
To link to this blog (humorlife) use [blog humorlife] in your messages.
|
|
|
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
1
|
21
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
71
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
