Note: Today’s column by Maria Padhila originally published on July 9, 2011. — Amanda
By Maria Padhila
I love The Official Map of Non-Monogamy — created by Franklin Veaux, a witty and bracingly cynical writer whose topics include polyamory — not least because it’s a fine visual display of information. And then there are the very funny examples it cites, such as: “My husband died. As his brother, Onan, it is your duty to give me a baby,” proving that non-monogamy in one form or another has one hell of a long pedigree.
On the map are a couple of green and gray-green rectangles labeled “swinging,” “closed-group swinging,” and “soft swing,” which makes me think of something that safely soaks fine washables clean in three minutes, or maybe takes care of rough elbows.
Both of which I suppose I could have used as I poked around the edges of swingtown recently.
In an attempt to get an official definition of “soft swing,” I went to Wikipedia. (For anything hard, you have to go to WikiLeaks.) It tells me this means “the couple engage in sexual activities while two or more other couples perform sex acts in the immediate vicinity.”
I admire the subject-verb agreement, a lost art where “couple” are concerned. It’s that “immediate vicinity” part that stumps me. Down the block? Like Eric says, masturbation is queer; and having sex in a hotel, and certainly in a campsite, means a couple are soft swinging.
Wikipedia also tells me that swinging occurred in the 16th century when “a formal arrangement was signed by John Dee, his wife Jane, his scryer, Edward Kelley and Kelley’s wife Joanna on 22 April 1587, whereby conjugal relations would be shared between the men and their spouses. This arose following seances which apparently resulted in spirits guiding Dee and Kelley towards this course of action.”