FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Swingers Chat

Swinging

Jump to newest
 

By *hidubem OP   Man
over a year ago

beckton

Have you been swinging during the pandemic? and if so how has it gone

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rincess peachWoman
over a year ago

shits creek

No. It's not only against site rules but kind of against the law.

I can understand people making online connections or video calling etc, but my libido is well dead and as things stand I won't be meeting for a long old time and have zero interest in cam shenanigans.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rincess peachWoman
over a year ago

shits creek

How about you? Have you been swinging during the pandemic and if so, how has it gone?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ebel Red HotWoman
over a year ago

York

God no but then I have a brain and respect for other people and society in general! No to meet up right now is the act of a self centred all about me type and that's not me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

no bloody way think more of my family than to put them at risk

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iking SoftiesCouple
over a year ago

Chesterfield

We haven't because it makes sense not to, quite frustrating really as we had a year off fab and only rejoined in March. It won't be for ever though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

Absolutely not and it amazes me how many ppl still write asking to meet. As someone above said - we’ve had to see this as a year off (hopefully won’t be longer)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allBristolManMan
over a year ago

nowhere

Nope! I care about my community enough to basically not leave the house unless vital (VITAL!)

Working hard to make chat / cam connections and friendships insted

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Did you think you were gonna get loads of people admitting to having orgies, OP?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *partharmonyCouple
over a year ago

Ruislip

We have socialised with Fabbers three times, sticking to social distancing rules. Fortunately two of those times we were all naked, so it wasn't without its pleasures.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"no bloody way think more of my family than to put them at risk"
Bravo!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Define swinging? If you mean group play, then no.

If you mean one to one, then yes but that's not swinging, it's just sex between two people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not."

Was that aimed at me? You've blocked me I notice

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not."

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?"

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious."

While you're correct in what you're saying here, and you are correct that the 'bubble' concept is flawed - people are also free to make their own informed decisions on who they mix with. This is especially important for single people who, in my case, have been home alone for 10 months and some form of physical contact is extremely important to them both mentally and physically. It is NOT just about getting laid, as you point out.

Personally I have been completely socially distanced from all my friends, family and loved ones that entire time, and the toll that takes on a person cannot be underestimated. You are a couple, so I can only assume you have had contact with each other in that time. Some of us have not had that luxury, so for you to say all of this, while true, it's not realistic, nor is it particularly empathic.

The pandemic has affected people very differently, and your experience does not reflect that of others.

I agree with you we all have a responsibility, and that DOES extend to spending time with other people in as safe a manner as possible.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious."

Well that’s not true, since March restrictions have been lifted and tightened to various levels, if as a single male you have a FB who has been in your bubble since the start then you can’t really say your spreading anything, and who’s to say what’s essential to who. No one said anything about magic protection so I know not of what you speak.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious.

While you're correct in what you're saying here, and you are correct that the 'bubble' concept is flawed - people are also free to make their own informed decisions on who they mix with. This is especially important for single people who, in my case, have been home alone for 10 months and some form of physical contact is extremely important to them both mentally and physically. It is NOT just about getting laid, as you point out.

Personally I have been completely socially distanced from all my friends, family and loved ones that entire time, and the toll that takes on a person cannot be underestimated. You are a couple, so I can only assume you have had contact with each other in that time. Some of us have not had that luxury, so for you to say all of this, while true, it's not realistic, nor is it particularly empathic.

The pandemic has affected people very differently, and your experience does not reflect that of others.

I agree with you we all have a responsibility, and that DOES extend to spending time with other people in as safe a manner as possible.

"

It's not particularly "empathic" to endanger other people's lives because you feel lonely, either.

We've both been incredibly alone in our lives, never would have put others at risk to assuage that misery

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious.

Well that’s not true, since March restrictions have been lifted and tightened to various levels, if as a single male you have a FB who has been in your bubble since the start then you can’t really say your spreading anything, and who’s to say what’s essential to who. No one said anything about magic protection so I know not of what you speak."

You talking of "bubbles" like it means anything. That is the "magic protection" referred to.

Unless the two of you NEVER go outside except to go straight in a car to each others house and have no contact with anyone else, ever, then "bubbles" are meaningless.

The only "essential" things are things that you need to live.

Everything else needs put aside until you are not endangering others to get it.

Simple.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious.

While you're correct in what you're saying here, and you are correct that the 'bubble' concept is flawed - people are also free to make their own informed decisions on who they mix with. This is especially important for single people who, in my case, have been home alone for 10 months and some form of physical contact is extremely important to them both mentally and physically. It is NOT just about getting laid, as you point out.

Personally I have been completely socially distanced from all my friends, family and loved ones that entire time, and the toll that takes on a person cannot be underestimated. You are a couple, so I can only assume you have had contact with each other in that time. Some of us have not had that luxury, so for you to say all of this, while true, it's not realistic, nor is it particularly empathic.

The pandemic has affected people very differently, and your experience does not reflect that of others.

I agree with you we all have a responsibility, and that DOES extend to spending time with other people in as safe a manner as possible.

It's not particularly "empathic" to endanger other people's lives because you feel lonely, either.

We've both been incredibly alone in our lives, never would have put others at risk to assuage that misery "

So in your view I'm selfish, nasty and evil. Thank you.

None of this is black & white, and you do have some valid points. I would just like people to have a bit more understanding of other people's lives & viewpoints. Something you appear to struggle with, as outlined by your responses and blocking (of me) for no reason.

I've met people under controlled conditions (not that it's any of your business). Two adults with no symptoms, or outside contact with others, both single, both living alone. Going to the supermarket is way more risky in my view - mixing with strangers in a closed environment. Meeting one on one as described above does not pose any risk to you or the general public but you fail to see other people's opinions as in any way valid.

Again, thank you for your judgement of us, strangers, and thank you for making us feel worse than we already do. I'll keep them in mind: Selfish. Nasty. Evil.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Only selfish, nasty, evil people who think it's okay for people to die so they can ejaculate would meet during a pandemic, so of course not.

What if people have been meeting within there bubble? Or outside of lockdown? Are they still nasty and evil?

Oh yes the mystical "bubble" of safety that in no way merely enables the facilitation of excusing dangerous behaviour.

It doesn't matter if you're only meeting in..."your bubble".

You are not magically protected from having, getting or spreading the virus just because you have given the people you have socialised with a special title.

If you mingle with ANY people for any non-essential reason and, by extension, put lives/health in danger all for your pleasure/impatience/convenience etc then that is wrong and my statement stands.

Really not sure why this even needed to be asked/stated.

It is emminently obvious.

While you're correct in what you're saying here, and you are correct that the 'bubble' concept is flawed - people are also free to make their own informed decisions on who they mix with. This is especially important for single people who, in my case, have been home alone for 10 months and some form of physical contact is extremely important to them both mentally and physically. It is NOT just about getting laid, as you point out.

Personally I have been completely socially distanced from all my friends, family and loved ones that entire time, and the toll that takes on a person cannot be underestimated. You are a couple, so I can only assume you have had contact with each other in that time. Some of us have not had that luxury, so for you to say all of this, while true, it's not realistic, nor is it particularly empathic.

The pandemic has affected people very differently, and your experience does not reflect that of others.

I agree with you we all have a responsibility, and that DOES extend to spending time with other people in as safe a manner as possible.

It's not particularly "empathic" to endanger other people's lives because you feel lonely, either.

We've both been incredibly alone in our lives, never would have put others at risk to assuage that misery

So in your view I'm selfish, nasty and evil. Thank you.

None of this is black & white, and you do have some valid points. I would just like people to have a bit more understanding of other people's lives & viewpoints. Something you appear to struggle with, as outlined by your responses and blocking (of me) for no reason.

I've met people under controlled conditions (not that it's any of your business). Two adults with no symptoms, or outside contact with others, both single, both living alone. Going to the supermarket is way more risky in my view - mixing with strangers in a closed environment. Meeting one on one as described above does not pose any risk to you or the general public but you fail to see other people's opinions as in any way valid.

Again, thank you for your judgement of us, strangers, and thank you for making us feel worse than we already do. I'll keep them in mind: Selfish. Nasty. Evil."

The only thing I judge is any non-essential contact with people you don't live with as it could lead to disability and death for a lot of people.

If you have an issue with that, then that's something you need to think about/deal with.

Have a nice day

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You don't get to decide what other people believe is non-essential contact.

I only have an issue with strangers making snap judgements about other people choices & behaviours.

At every turn you ignore what I've explained. Goodbye.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You don't get to decide what other people believe is non-essential contact.

I only have an issue with strangers making snap judgements about other people choices & behaviours.

At every turn you ignore what I've explained. Goodbye."

No, I don't. The word "essential" defines "essential" quite nicely as it is.

Also I have "ignored" nothing. There is a difference between you being unable to change my mind and me not listening.

Anyone that considers sex/feeling less lonely to be "more essential" than the lives and health of others is a terrible person.

Pretty hard to dispute that.

Have a nice day, I think all that needs to be said has been said

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago

Titz Towers, North Notts

No. I know too many vulnerable people for whom Covid is likely to be a death sentence. I like these people. Some of them count on me to help them with things. I have no wish to make them run a risk. I badly need to get laid, but that can bide.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nique_78Woman
over a year ago

Home, somewhere in Norfolk

So this is my opinion and if you want to judge me for it please keep it to yourself.

The government told us it was safe to go back to work and we did, they said it was safe to mix with others and we did...now there's limitations to what we can do or see such as the bubble - people are using it as instructed. Yes some CHOOSE to ignore guidelines set out but surely that's their perogative to do so, I personally don't agree with their choice but I'm not going to judge or attack it because here's the kicker, you'll always be around someone who could potentially have covid by going to work, shop or the like!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ave-and-LouiseCouple
over a year ago

Torquay

No, can't say there hasn't been the temptation at points when someone's caught our eye, but we have to much at stake. Young baby at home, close relatives that are high risk and once of us working in healthcare. Sex with others can wait. I understand that it must be hard for those who are single though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So this is my opinion and if you want to judge me for it please keep it to yourself.

The government told us it was safe to go back to work and we did, they said it was safe to mix with others and we did...now there's limitations to what we can do or see such as the bubble - people are using it as instructed. Yes some CHOOSE to ignore guidelines set out but surely that's their perogative to do so, I personally don't agree with their choice but I'm not going to judge or attack it because here's the kicker, you'll always be around someone who could potentially have covid by going to work, shop or the like! "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 17/12/20 15:49:53]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abonWoman
over a year ago

L’boro/Ashby & Cheltenham

The original question was about swinging, which I guess would mean meets between singles/couples/more.

However, there was no distinction between casual one off arrangements and more ‘established’ meetings, which is where I think the detail lies.

If people are having successive one-off meets with others without respecting social distancing generally, or leaving periods between get-togethers to watch for any symptoms, I would put that in the reckless category. But if those conditions are being met, I would say the increased risk is very small...and valid.

There is a phenomenal amount of research that shows human contact and physical touch are basic mammalian needs. Human development is stunted without touch, suicide hotlines are beyond capacity, even our immune systems benefit when there is human contact. Connection is the most important factor when it comes to our lifespan.

Please can we differentiate between reckless behaviour motivated by shopping and alcohol, and informed and thoughtful behaviour designed to keep people alive in all the other ways that matter.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *uriousKinksterMan
over a year ago

Loughborough

C and I haven't done much of anything, but everything we have done has bee a within the confines of the law.

Because my *personal* opinion is that I can manage my own risks (work from home 100%, don't go out to shop, don't mingle with anyone else), when it comes to the *guidance* I'm happy to accept the (statistically very minor) risk if the all others involved are.

This takes into account that both my parents, and remaining grandparents are very high risk, and thus part of the above involves not meeting - for swinging or anything else - any time around when I know I'll be in contact with them.

It seems like there's a lot of hostility around this subject, and let's be honest Covid is massively polarising, but I think that so long as the laws are being followed, its up to the individual to make their own choices. That is *not* to say that it's sensible for people to be reckless and not take small, simple, sensible precautions, but again if it's not a law, who are we to judge?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top