Every now and then on this site, I see someone point out that swinging and polyamory are not the same thing. But they don’t explain what the difference is. Searching the boards didn’t turn up a comprehensive description of what each of them are and what each of them are not.
So, I’m confused. Just about everything I know about swingyamoring I know from the SDMB. I did some googling, but it wasn’t too helpful. I kept finding myself on porn sites with endless popups. There are a lot of naked people on the internet.
So, could somebody explain the difference to me?
It would be helpful to give some examples of situations that would be considered “polyamory” and some that would be considered “swinging.” ‘Cause to an ol’ square like me, it’s kind of hard to imagine the administrative details of non-monogamy.
(n.b. If you want to debate the merits of monogamy vs. non-monogamy, start your own thread.)
My impression is that “swinging” is basically casual sex by permission of all involved (including non-participating partners), with nothing expected for a future relationship, and “polyamory” describes serious committed relationships that happen to involve more than two people.
Before reading SDMB threads about this, I would have said that “polyamory” was the general term for all serious relationships of more than two adults, and “swinging” and “group marriages” were subsets of this.
I am far from an expert on this, as I currently have serious committed relationships with 0 people. No doubt an expert will be along shortly to clarify things.
Cindy originally coupled with Brian met Tom who was married to Catherine and they discussed this with Brian and Catherine, who after awhile decided to become a foursome.
If this had been a swinging arrangement, we’d perhaps expect Cindy and Brian to (eventually) take their leave of Tom and Catherine and perhaps a few weekends later get it on with Joe and Susan. Instead, Cindy and Brian and Tom and Catherine opened up a joint account and bought a house and are raising a couple of kids together.
As soon as I read your post, AHunter3, that theme music wafted through my head.
Actually, upon reflection, this would make a rather good sitcom. Four housemates gradually become a working group marriage, and all the adventures along the way…
Mike and Carol are happily married. Mike has a higher sex drive than Carol. Carol suggests that he might want to get it on with Alice. Alice agrees, because she loves her long-term boyfriend Sam, but he appears to be asexual. So, Mike and Carol continue in their happy marriage, having sex once a week on Saturday nights. A few times a week, Mike visits Alice in her room, where they have sex. Sam doesn’t know what’s going on with Alice and Mike, but Alice thinks it’s okay because she never made any kind of commitment to him.
Carol and Alice have been together for years. Carol doesn’t want to deal with a messy divorce, though, so the idea is for Alice to do Mike for a while, gain his trust and whack him during one of their sessions. See, Alice doesn’t live with them, Carol will be the #1 suspect but DNA will clear her of any wrongdoing, and then the cops will just have to conclude that it was a crazed intruder. Oh sure, they’ll find evidence of another woman on Mike, but with no idea of who he was having an affair with, the case will quickly turn cold. Carol gets all of Mike’s pension, Social Security, and life insurance, and then in a while she will start moving in on Sam and get rid of him for Alice. Alice would do it herself, but she’s gonna be tired already from taking out Mike.
Oh, God and if Train A leaves Denver at 3:00 and Train B leaves New York at 4:15…
So let me make sure I’m understanding the situation. Cindy and Brian are a couple (as opposed to the other meaning of “coupling” with someone), and Tom and Catherine are a couple. Am I right so far?
So if Cindy’s casually doing Tom, and/or Brian’s doing Catherine, or they’re all casually doing each other, that’s swinging, right? Because it’s casual sex rather than a real relationship.
But if Cindy has an ongoing emotional (on top of the physical) relationship with Tom and/or Catherine, that’s polyamory, right?
So what is it if Cindy’s got an emotional relationship with Tom, has no emotional ties with Catherine at all, but still sometimes has casual sex with her? Because she’s in a relationship with Tom, I’d say it was polyamory, but then there’s the whole casual sex thing that makes me think it’s swinging. Can it be both at the same time, or are the terms mutually exclusive?
No he’s not. He’s into necrophiliac bestiality. That’s why his butcher shop is so popular. All the ladies ask him why the meat is so tender…he tells them that he makes sure to pound every piece before he sells it!
And Abbie–there’s a flaw in your theory. Alice and Carol couldn’t have been together for years. Carol only married Mike recently. Unless…wait a minute…we never did know how Mike met Carol. Maybe Alice fixed them up! Brilliant!
Now, remember they tried to do that post-Brady Bunch show where Marcia and Jan had a joint wedding and moved into the same house with their new husbands? Assuming they’re not a foursome, but two separate couples, but they do a lotta swapping, but only with each other, what’s that? (of course, Marcia and Jan are never in the same room during these encounters. Jan would just get jealous…“Why does Marcia get to be on top all the time? Marcia Marcia Marcia!”)
Swinging generally implies a lesser emotional commitment between the parties. One couple can have several friends with whom they share beds and maintain friendships (or not) or they can go on the circuit and find different swinging partners every week if they want.
Polyamory implies a deeper, long-term commitment akin to your standard boyfriend/girlfriend/marriage thing. Sort of like a group marriage where all parties are committed to the ongoing health and welfare of the group and offspring.
I suppose there could be polyamorous groups where man A is polyamourous with girl b and c but b and c don’t actually feel any emotional attachment. But I’m pretty certain the technical term for that would be ‘unstable’.
Going back to a real life relationship(s) I knew well:
Anne and Andy had been married for about ten years, happy and monogamous so far as I knew. And, as I said, I knew them well: Anne was my college roommate, and I’d dated Andy for a while. I’m sure Anne at least would have told me about any other relationships/swinging she was doing.
Then Anne met Brenda and fell in love with her. Brenda (a lesbian) returned the feelings. Anne still loved Andy and had no wish to divorce him. Andy may or may not have had any interest in Brenda, but Brenda had zero interest in sex with Andy or any other man. After many, many discussions, they sorted it out this way: Anne and Brenda went through a marriage ceremony (officiated by some sort of Wicca ‘official’) and they declared that Andy was married to Anne only, and Brenda was married to Anne only, but Anne was married to both Andy and Brenda!
All three of them moved into a two bedroom apartment. One bedroom was Andy’s, one was Brenda’s, and Anne fluttered between the two as impulse (and maybe fairness) took her. What did Andy gain from the situation? I think a) not losing his wife completely which could have happened if he’d delivered an ultimatum and b) I think he got off on the idea of lesbian sex.
It may surprise you to learn that this was a very happy threesome. It persisted for almost six years and a couple of housing changes. It would likely still be on-going if Brenda hadn’t died. (No, you cynics, not due to any machinations of Andy, she had pancreatic cancer.)
I think you could dream up any possible combination of sexes & orientations & who does what with whom & and somewhere out there is a group that matches the description.
If human sexuality was intended by God to be simple and straightforward, as many Christian Fundamentalists like to claim, then he sure botched the assembly instructions.
