[UUPoly-L] Learning about Polyamory and Swinging

["Ken Haslam" <haslamk@gmail.com>]

I like Doug's idea about the continuum between swinging and Polyamory.  It
is all analogue, not digital.  There are infinite varieties of relationships
and sexualities.  Kinsey was fascinated by biological diversity.  There are
no two of us alike, either brains or bodies and so there will be no two
relationships or sexual connections alike.   And for that matter there will
be no two Poly families (or non families for that matter) alike.

Someone said "Nature loves diversity,  society hates it".

Some ten years ago I entered the Poly world and loved it so much I became an
activist.  I learned about Poly and was very quickly exposed to swinging.  I
really didn't know much about swinging, wasn't horrified by the idea, and so
decided to find out more.  I went to private swing parties, I went to
clubs.   BDSM soon came into my world because, as an activist, I went to
meetings where I met BDSM types who were also Poly (and some even
Unitarian).  So I decided to learn about BDSM too.  Why not?

As a result of actually getting into the cultures of swinging and BDSM I
find I am comfortable in both.  I can go to a club and play.  I go home and
feel good about the experience because I have perspective on it.   Same for
BDSM.  I call myself a "swolly" with just a touch of BDSM for additional
flavoring.  I love the comfort of being able to participate and not be
consumed by any one life path.   As a good Poly I just want to have it all.


I think it is vital for everyone in this community who talks about swinging
and BDSM on these lists to actually have some up front laboratory experience
in all of these communities.  Go to swing clubs, meet the people,  play if
you are so inclined, don't play if you are not.  Swingers are really nice
folks.  Attend some BDSM parties and conventions, learn a bit about it,  try
using a flogger or experience waxing or getting tied up.  Experiment and
just try it out.  You don't have to like it -- just understand it.  You will
find that folks into BDSM are really nice folks.

With some real experience you are now in a much better place to talk about
the pros and cons of Poly and swinging (and even BDSM).  It infuriates me to
see folks talking about things they really know nothing about except what
they have been programmed to think.  And reading books if fine but there is
no substitute for some getting some experience.

I have found that swing, Poly and BDSM all meet needs in a very safe way.
All are not to everyone's liking.   If you don't like it don't do it.  But
please don't criticize those who do do it in a safe, sane, and consensual
way.

I learned long ago that the best way to learn how many teeth are in a horses
mouth is to open it up and count.  Same for swing, poly, and bdsm.

And as I mature in the swing, poly and BDSM communities I find that more and
more people are beginning to understand the continuum between the two ends
of the spectrum.

Ken Haslam


---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Doug Walters" <dougwalt1@comcast.net>
> To: <uupoly-l@uupa.org>
> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 09:23:21 -0800
> Subject: [UUPoly-L] Polyamory vs. Swinging
> I see the list venturing into the poly and swing distinctions.  I'm this
> and
> not that.  Well I'm that somewhat and does that mean I can't be some of
> this
> also.  I think of trying to distinguish between polyamory and swinging is
> similiar to the discussion a few years ago about being straight or
> gay.  You
> were one or the other.  Bi-sexuals were just people that wouldn't make up
> their minds.
>
> Then Alfred Kinsey, a famous sex researcher, created a scale for
> understanding sexual orientation during his groundbreaking research in the
> 1940s. He put heterosexuality on one side of the scale and homosexuality
> on
> the other, leaving plenty of room in the middle for the ambiguities of
> life.
> And yes it is not a perfect representation of sexual orientation in that
> it
> is too simple.
>
> However it helps me to think of relationship orientation as being on a
> continuem.  Monogomist on one end and non-monogomist on the other end.
> Along the scale you sprinkle titles.  Single partner marriage, poly
> fidelity, open relationship, cheating, swinging, and so on.  I'm not sure
> how to actually construct such a representation.  Has anyone done that or
> seen a paper on the subject?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Doug W
> Portland, OR