115
Risk vs Benefit decisions in swinging : Swingers Discussion 41576
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsSwinger AdviceRisk vs Benefit decisions in swinging
TOPIC: Risk vs Benefit decisions in swinging
Created by: mischiefnyou
Original Starting post for this thread:
What risks seem worth the benefit? What risks are not?

These are personal questions.

It’s easy to talk about statistics quoting some big dog. How relevant is that in daily life? How do you use information when deciding what you will and won’t do?

Do you continue to take the evil drug of month (estrogen, Celebrex, etc) in spite of the new information? Why? Because perceived risk is less than the benefit.

For me, it’s better to take estrogen than attack the sofa with a hatchet. That’s the entire thing. The perceived risk is less than the benefit.

Regarding STDs. I stopped actively seeking out and playing with MSM men in 1981. The perceived risk (HIV) was greater than the benefit. I used the statistics to alter my behavior.

I have made many swinging decisions based on perceived risk. I insist on condoms for intercourse. Statistically they reduce risk.

I avoid urban youth. I have nothing in common with them anyway. Why avoid urban youth? Statistically they are more likely to have HIV.

Does this mean I have no risk? No.

Playing with swingers is less risky than the neighborhood slut. Why? Swingers are more alert for bodily changes that occur with STD infections. They get fully checked up regularly. It’s not socially acceptable to give your friends an STD.. Smile.

Some members want you to believe statistics/information is useless in making some decisions but not others. Condoms statistically reduce risk. That’s ok to say. Utilizing the same thinking regarding MSM is not ok.

I have and will continue to alter my behavior based on perceived risks. In some circles it’s called RACK. Risk Aware Consensual Kink. The key is Risk Aware.

How do you use information in your life?

Mischief Note: I’m not bashing MSM. I have loved them.

GoTo Page: 1 2
 1 to 10 of 16   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Good luck looking for a partner. I know you will find one. I did.

smiles

Mischief

Glen Burnie MD
Username hidden
(2783 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
MSM is a medical reference for men who have sex with men.

Many men ID as straight but have sex with men. It takes sexual orientation out of it. It labels behavior.

waves to ABS,

Mischief

Glen Burnie MD
Username hidden
(2783 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I encountered another Kind of risk this weekend. It's the same one my husband has. Fear of losing control emotionally. I do not have this issue but the gentleman I was with does.

It seems certain types of sex cause him and hubby to lose perspective and become more bonded than they want.

I have no problem becoming emotionally involved. It would be extremely hard to play with a woman over time and not fall in love. It's what you do with the feelings that matters.

Maintaining perspective is easier for some. I am rarely swayed from my bond with hubby. There was only one lady who came close to moving me. She was easily rebuffed in the end.

Just another reason this gig is not for folks unable to maintain perspective.

Mischief

Glen Burnie MD
Username hidden
(2783 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Bump for curious69

Glen Burnie MD
Username hidden
(2783 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Mike:

I agree with Va. I have no problem being friends with most folks. But sexual adventures are reserved for folks who meet the same criteria as VA stated.

I experienced major fear when waiting for my first HIV test. That fear has NOT been forgotten. Nothing will get me to change my choice now.

Mischief.

Glen Burnie MD
Username hidden
(2783 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
You got it, Mike. But playing with someone we felt constituted unnecessary risk would be a "No go" for us, regardless of the demographic.

We really have only two demographics that we pay attention to. One is age, and the other is MSM. Age range is the one demographic that could easily be discarded if we clicked with someone at a party, but we wouldn't search online for someone outside our preferred age range.

The only demographic we would avoid is MSM, because they ARE in a higher risk category, and we don't feel the need to assume extra risk when we have lots of couples with straight males in our area.

Naturally, we make every effort to avoid other high risk groups such as IV drug users. Hell, we avoid users of ANY illegal drugs if at all possible.

South Riding VA
Username hidden
(8172 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
So am I gettin this right? Both of you avoid the demographic when you're searchin for playmates. But when you meet someone on an individual basis, you consider them as an individual and base your conclusions on what you learn about them personally as you get to know them. ???

Mike

Bedford PA
Username hidden
(5527 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Mike:

I avoid folks who I perceive are at greater risk. I know it sounds awful but I have my reasons. I have trouble with believing most people with regards to sex.

The reason the medical community calls it MSM? Because so many of those guys ID as straight.

I will never say never but trust and penis are a tough combo. My former was very trustworthy. I knew who and where. That's all I needed. He and his wife where busy swingers. He had a MAJOR trauma regarding his wife. Some women can be outrageously nasty, mean, sick.

Something happened to him. He became "private". His behavior was not up for discussion. The issues boiled down to his privacy or my right to know. I dissolved the relationship. Privacy=lying.

It's been six months. I still have pain in my heart. We were bonded very closely for 3 years. No matter. You lie. You go bye. Trust? With disclosure only.

Mischief<--earned her stripes the old fashioned way.

Glen Burnie MD
Username hidden
(2783 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Our time for swinging fun is extremely limited. The supply of folks in our preferred demographic groups already exceeds our ability to meet even some of the most appealing. Ergo, we do NOT knowingly meet people outside our preferred demographic groups.

Nowadays we meet most couples new to us at friends' house parties, and we we get as much information as we can about the invited guests from our host & hostess, usually including their screen names on one or more swinger sites. That allows us to review their profiles before the party.

Then we adhere to the dictum "When in doubt, don't."

South Riding VA
Username hidden
(8172 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Jim & Misschief, a question, do you catagorically and permanantly avoid all those in your chosen demographic groups, or do you make occasional exceptions for those you get to know on a personal level first. You both say you have nothing against vertical relationships with those in your "taboo" groups. I'm just wondering if any went from vertical only to horizontal after you came to know and trust them. Or do you never trust them because of the group they came from? I really am jus curious and I will not argue with your answers.

Mike

Bedford PA
Username hidden
(5527 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2
 1 to 10 of 16   End
TOPIC: Risk vs Benefit decisions in swinging