Swingular

Upperstrasburg Swingers in Pennsylvania

Upperstrasburg Swingers

If you are looking for Swingers in Upperstrasburg, PA, then Swingular is the place for you. We have hundreds of thousands of swingers all over Upperstrasburg looking to meet new people. Here is a list of 16 random Swingers within 100 miles of Upperstrasburg, PA. To see more or to contact these members, click here to create a free account.

Upperstrasburg Threesomes Upperstrasburg Menage A Trois Upperstrasburg Group Sex Upperstrasburg Foursomes Upperstrasburg Bi-Female Upperstrasburg BBW Upperstrasburg Gang Bang Upperstrasburg MMF Upperstrasburg MFM Upperstrasburg Personals Upperstrasburg Ads Upperstrasburg Photos Upperstrasburg Girl on Girl Upperstrasburg Nudists Upperstrasburg Exhibitionists Upperstrasburg Voyeurs Upperstrasburg Exhibitionists Upperstrasburg Voyeurs

Upperstrasburg, Pennsylvania Swingers can be found on Swingular. It's easy to find others using our advanced search technology. We base our search by zipcode so you will see how far each member is away from you by miles. You can search locally or you can search by state or zipcode as well. We have thousands of members from Upperstrasburg, Pennsylvania so you have a very good chance that you will meet someone to your liking. We also have a booty call feature so you can post a booty call for quick response. Create your free account today and begin hooking up with Upperstrasburg Swingers right away!

Newbie Advice? - - Unless that's specifically the scene you are looking for and only want to play in you might want to seriously reconsider your screen name. A HUGE misconception among single males looking to play in the lifestyle is that most, or even many, married males are cucks looking for a bull to fuck their wives. While there certainly are some that are into that scene they are a very small minority of swingers. You might want to check out some cuck-specific websites or maybe even some Hotwife sites rather than swinger sites if that's your thing.

It's an age, old, question. - No, I'm NOT 94.... - Meh. Fuck who ya wanna fuck and don't fuck who ya don't wanna fuck. It's all about mutual attraction and we all get to decide what parameters we will incorporate in choosing fuck partners. Be it age, common interests, body size/shape, or just simply sexual attraction. We can't help but remember when we were n00bs and people would occasionally get upset when we didn't want to fuck them. We called it the "You're a swinger, I'm a swinger." syndrome and it boiled down to some people not taking polite rejection well. We were often accused of not being "real swingers" if we didn't hop into the sack with someone simply because they also happened to be swingers, regardless of mutual attraction. People all too often seem to get butt hurt very easily simply because someone declines to bump uglies with them. Put on your big boy (or girl) panties, pick yourself up and move on. There are FAR worse things in this world than a particular person or persons not wanting to have sex with you. If someone rejects your sexual advances just give them a polite curtsey, a little wink and tap dance off the stage. Rant over....Seacrest out!

To be or not to be a swinger that is the question??? - what made you decide? - well we have talked about it off and on for years. one night i walked in from work and holly was on a swingers website. she said hat do yeh think . i was ok with it . we started talking with this cpl in ky. and we soon was meeting them for dinner . we went to the dinner with no intentions of hooking up that night. but the more we talked to them the more we found we all clicked. so a 1 hour dinner date turned into 6 plus hours of playing. but here in east tenn there isnt many cpls that is for real. or they get cold feet at the last moment. we even run into players , that those who try to play us . those that have been into this for awhile know what we are talking about. after our last baby 3 yaers ago we just cant find the time to get out much anymore.

The thin line in the sand. - Where does "cheating" begin? - I wrote this somewhere else...but hopefully it fits here. "Fidelity. What is it? Most of you (some of you) might think I'm gonna come off as a hypocrite on this one. But please, bear with me. Fidelity is a key issue with me in relationships. It's one of the only lines that exist that is an instant kill switch. I've been in relationships where I've had to pull that switch and watch the bodies fall. Then again, I look at the insane stance I take in my "Sexual Play" life. Swingers. Kink that plays with submissives. Dangerous, flirtatious chat. Both Domme and I have regular communication with past lovers. Yet...faithful. How does that make sense you ask? Even when "Swinging" or involved in Kink "play" we always play together. Our communications are open. And in the end it all comes down to one very simple thing. Trust. So where does that leave Fidelity? As a personal choice between two consenting adults." That's my line...hope it helps! -Mr. K_T

How do you do it? - How do you manage to keep your hands off... EVERYONE?!?! - Yup, KIDSATPLAY has it right. Few, if any, of our vanilla friends know we're in the lifestyle. In fact, I think the only ones who know are actually former swingers who've retired or whatever from swinging. I guess I too wonder why you would even tell vanillas or how they found out. But worst case scenario, if they found out and expect you to fuck them, I'd just laugh and say, "That's not really what swinging is all about. You've seen too many movies or tv shows about swingers that totally get it wrong." Then, if they want a more detailed explanation you can decide if you want to really get into it with them and just explain that it's NOT about fucking the nearest available hole but rather seeking and finding connections that then, perhaps, might turn into a physical connection as well. If they still push hard to fuck you then maybe you could fake an STD. [em]Emo_4[/em]

LDS Swingers Survey - Will any former/active LDS swingers take my survey? - done :)

Important ! Please read this post. - - [quote]You know, I read the sign on my way in here that said "Don't feed the trolls!", but I'm bored and this looks like a fun way to kill a few minutes. So, let's get started shall we?[/quote] Ahhhhhhhhhhh another guy who [b]THINKS[/b] he knows something, but later on proves that he doesn't.... [quote]We all participate in risky behavior, huh? I suppose that depends on your definition of "risky". If you really want to be pedantic, every time you draw breath you're taking a risk. You take an even bigger risk should you choose to not draw breath. [/quote] I am sorry, thought this was a swinger site... I guess you have a study that's not from the 1990's that shows that over 50% of people engage in swinging, right? Nope, you don't, therefore we engage in risky behavior! [quote]Typically when one uses the term "risky behavior" they're implicitly saying "behavior that is risky beyond the risk of normal behavior". Having sex with your spouse, regardless of whether they're cheating or not, is not risky behavior. [/quote] Regardless if they're cheating? Really? What, praytell, are you doing here, I guess you've solved the world's STD's crisis, right? Found a shot that cures herpes and HIV? Then how is it [b]NOT[/b] risky if they are cheating? [quote]Uhm... Did I miss something? What exactly are you saying "BULLSHIT!" to? It seems fairly clear that you're both stating the same sentiment.. are you calling bullshit on the fact that he bothered replying?[/quote] AHHHHHHH....Failed reading comprehension, did we? Let's have a look at what they said... What you UNDERLINED is the key.... WITHOUT complete absinence............ Without abstinence, you're engaging in risky behavior! Now, one could say, 'I use condoms, dental damns, and ALWAYS practice safe sex!' Is that enough? Let's see, ever been with a squirter? Ever had a woman get so worked up that her juices are squishing around on your balls? I guess that's not enough to catch something, right? Dr. Darcone, me thinks you need to rethink your ideas. [quote]Are you actively going about doing cultures of these things, just looking for a place disease can be communicated from?[/quote] I don't have to, I pay taxes so I don't. [quote]I don't know about the rest of you, but if there's a wet towel at the gym, and it's not mine, I'm not touching it. Soap Dishes? You know, I've always wondered at the point of anti-microbial soap..[/quote] Have you ever heard the saying, 'It is better to remain silent and thought of as a fool than to open your mouth to remove all doubt?' This would apply for you. Wet towels look like dry ones, yours is next to theirs, and you've NEVER accidentally grabbed someone else's? A little nick on your hand, BINGO! Anti-Microbial soap ONLY works if left in place for 30 seconds or more. Now, you place your soap on the tray, anyplace that the soap touches, in 30 seconds, would be 99.9% free of microbes, HOWEVER, anywhere it doesn't touch isn't. But you wouldn't touch the soap tray with your fingers, then touch your eyes, nose or mouth, right? [quote]And before you knock wikipedia, it's been verified to be more accurate than any other available encyclopedia. So, while influenza and bronchitis may be transmitted sexually, they aren't STI's. If you get herpaghonasyphaclap from kissing some random corpse, then it is not sexually transmitted by definition. By the same token, an oral infection of HSV-1 is -not- an STI. It becomes an STI once it infects the sacral ganglia. Also worth noting is that neither the CDC nor WHO acknowledge HSV-1 as being an STI.[/quote] Chlamydia is the most common form of STD, it IS passed from casual and accidental contact, Herpes IS an STD, it also is passed from incidental contact. So, your entire premise if wrong. [quote]For the actual statistics on extramarital affairs, see: This Study published by Oxford (22-25% of men, 11-15% of women). (fwiw, that article is a fantastic meta-analysis of a broad range of studies)[/quote] Actually from a Colorado college, not Oxford. Oxford may be where you found it, but your reading comprehension is, once again, coming into question. The first sentence of your report states its from Colorado. The last time I checked, Oxford is not in Colorado. Additionally, the study is from over 10 years ago, nothing has changed since then, right? The internet hasn't become more prevalent? Easy access to willing sex partners hasn't added to the instances of EMI? Nah, nothing to see here. Perhaps one should look at a more priminent site for these things? Perhaps one should look at the sample size to determine statistical significance? Perhaps one should see who was 'randomly' selected to participate? [quote]Jim, do you actually have a point you're trying to espouse here? Are you just trying to say that sex isn't safe? I'm pretty sure we were all aware of that fact.[/quote] As a matter of fact I do, that point is: GROW THE FUCK UP! We're all taking risks, don't cry about the results of your risk taking. Would you allow someone who suddenly decided to try skydiving, had no training, packed their own chute, then jumped and was injured to complain about how they were injured? Of course not, but since it is someone who was TOTALLY aware of the risks involved and they're participating in KNOWN risky behavior its OK because you're participating in it also? [quote]Or are you trying to say "Who needs protection? Sex is dangerous no matter what!"? If that's what you're trying to say, you have much to learn on the difference between risk and certainty.[/quote] Not at all.... I am saying, we're all aware of the risks, we don't need to read their alligator tears because they rolled the dice and came up snake eyes. [quote]There are a plethora of things one can do to reduce the risk of contracting -any- STI. There's no certainty that you'll ever be completely safe from contracting one. There's also no certainty that you'll ever contract one.[/quote] For once, we can agree on something. [quote]One strong way you can reduce those risks is by clearly communicating what infections you're at risk of spreading. That's the purpose of this thread, and along with most everyone else, I'd like to thank the ABC's for their post.[/quote] Showing up at a swingers' party, club, or site is pretty clearly communicating that we're at risk of ANY sexually transmitted desease.

New Primary Picture Policies - Starting March 1st, 2009 - I wonder if our main pic would be considers an obvious sexual act. For the most part we have decent pics but I would like to point out that most people with dirty pics are real swingers but there seems to be a lot of new members with "decent" main photos that are frauds. we have just spent the last 3 days chatting and making plans with a perv that has pics of his kids. If any one would like to know who this new member is hit us up and we will forward this s*#! heads profile to u.

The Party Cookbook - a cookbook created for the Swingular community - I have recieved emails in favor of this adventure as well as seeing the responses here. I am all for accepting the food recipes as well as drink recipes [I have a few I would like to add as well]. So I say let's get started!! Recipes can be for either food or drinks 1.Name of Recipe a. List all ingrediants and measurements b. Then state how to mix it up 2.Put down how you would like 'Submitted by' to be [your name or handle or anonymous] You can submit as many as 5 recipes but no more then this as we want to have others in the book as well If you like, also add a title suggestion for the cookbook. EXAMPLES: The Party Cookbook THE SMORGASBORD OF SWINGERS are two of the suggested titles thus far You can post them here and I will grab them daily/weekly [depending on submissions] or you can send them to me via HoneyDo69. LET'S GET THIS PARTY STARTED!!

Obama's Roadtrip - - [quote]Fair enough. Then why rely on them for anything that likely wasn't adequately studied?[/quote] Likely just does not do it for me...When the numbers are given AND shown how they were gathered, I tend to believe they are fairly accurate. [quote]Let's take your Pepsi/Coke example. There is likely nothing befuddling about your scenario. Just one possibility: Where are the two Florida products bottled? Maybe it's the water.[/quote] Both bottled locally, it is chalked up to being a preferance thing. In WI, lived there for a while, it was called pop or soda, unless a VERY specific thing was needed, a Mountain Dew for instance. In the south, it is a Coke no matter what it is. If someone in the south offers a Coke, it could be Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Diet Rite, Sam's Club Soda, etc. [quote]I'm glad you agree with the logic. My Bachelor's is in Social Welfare (Psych Minor). Human nature is only a bitch of a thing when you get out there a few standard deviations. The bulk of us are as predictable as rats.[/quote] Believe it or not, I have 2 BA's (econ and int. rel.) with a minor in social work. So I am very aware of social science standards and SOME believe that we're predictable. If you have a smaller sample, we are fairly predictable, especially when the sample is taken from a specific group of people (swingers for instance, better yet, swingers in a specific region), once you get to the larger populations (nationwide for instance), human behavior is not easily quantified. Try being the ONLY conservative in all the social work classes, it was fun! Then again, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. [quote]I propose that as an economist you are simply looking at things with a limited perspective. [/quote] Possibly, but I also have a rare ability to look at it from an outsider's view.... [quote]There is simply no question that if a person's basic needs (food and shelter) are met, there is less motivation to risk the consequences of violating societal rules.[/quote] I can see the logic of this, however, we are Americans, we always want MORE, we are constantly bombarded with images of MORE, we are constantly told that without MORE we are incomplete, etc. What are the consequences of violating societal rules? Food, shelter, clothing, TV, etc? Really tough there. Look at prisons in Mexico, if your family does not provide, you starve, more than likely. THAT is consequences, it is a deterrant (sp?). IMHO, one of the reasons for our increased crime rates is the lack of public punishment. If every time you turned around, you saw a group of people in black and white stripes mowing lawns, trimming trees, etc. on the side of the road in leg chains, it would cut crime considerably. If they did public executions, it would cut crime dramatically. Then again, I am a staunch supporter of heavy penalties for crimes, especially when they are repeat offenders, most of the social scientists are not. They want more rehab and such, which I also support, BUT only for first timers, not for repeat offenders. Anyway, I am thoroughly enjoying our debate... Next!

© Copyright 2001–2017 Swingular, an SB Entertainment Company.