Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login

Terminology of "SH Social Gatherings"

last reply
318 replies
9.0k views
1 watcher
0 likes

Does it matter ?

Yes 0%
No 0%
35 votes
Unknown User
Following recent discussions and a little confusion I’m seeing in the forums, I thought I would write this.
I am in no way having a dig at anyone, or the new systems we have in place on Swinging Heaven.
In my time here, and in helping to, and in organising social gatherings; I’ve seen many posts and PMs asking about Munches/Social etc and what they are/what happens etc etc. I don’t think I’ve seen a thread devoted to the subject – so here goes.
Why does it matter ?
Because I think everybody has a right to know at the outset, what to expect. There has been quite a large influx of newer members, that “we” sometimes no longer give enough time to. So much so, I’d be upset to think they would see some of the posts in LMU about “socials” and be misinformed by what they read.
I know the Mods are loathed to get involved in further “legislation” or definitions, but for reasons I’ll go into, I think something needs to be said outloud and in public by somebody.
So I’ll say it, and take it on the chin where necessary.
We have a clearly defined definition of “What is a Munch” here
But more often lately, the term “Social” is being used. Partly, I believe, to get round/comply with the rules contained in the official Munch definition and the posting across two or more other sites.
Another reason for the confusion is, I think the influx of people to the forum, particularly LMU, from the chatrooms and Photo Ads now that we have the unified log in.
So .. . . . . . . .
IMHO
I think maybe a little clarification is needed.
I think there are three levels of social gatherings and it really is just simply a question of size/number of attendees, facilities available; and who is allowed to attend. Although -the question of who is allowed to attend what is a completely whole other subject that I also believe needs to be re-addressed before very much longer – in a thread of it’s own.
And I specifically use the word SOCIAL.
They should ALL be social gatherings. The behaviour and attitudes of people should be the same at all of them. And their purpose is unchanged, regardless of size; and that purpose is to socialise with, and meet socially, other members/swingers.
A no pressure/expectation environment.
Munches, Mini-Munches, and Socials.
And then there are what I would call “meets” for the purposes of “playing”
MUNCHES
Munches are defined HERE so I’m not going to labour that point, other than to say that as far as I’m concerned, the main criteria is the separation from vanilla people with regards to the room, the bar and toilets. Please; if you haven't read it, do so.
MINI-MUNCHES
Mini-Munches are just simply Munches on a smaller scale, for fewer people. The requirement for segregation from vanillas not being part of the criteria. The best examples I can give are the Leicester and two Burton Mini Munches. Not much help to those not there, I know.
At the Leicester, organised by Steph and Lovecommando a good while ago, half of the pub was screened off for us, but we shared the bar and toilets with the “normal clientele” At Burton, we sort of took over one section of the pub, but again shared the bar and other facilities; and were in full view of the whole pub.
SOCIALS
This seems to be where the grey area is showing itself in the forums.
I’ve always viewed posts about socials to be where maybe a dozen or so of us gather in a pub/eatery, take a couple of tables, or a corner for a few drink and a chat and giggle.
It seems to me, and I’m sure a few others, that some of the “socials” being posted are more a pre-playing “meet” to see who wants to shag who.
I’m not knocking that, I’m just saying that there should be a difference in the terminology and postings.
In the worst case scenario (for me) I wouldn’t want to go to the “trouble” of driving 20 or 30 miles for a social to find that after an hour, people start thinning out to go off shagging.
----------------------------------------------------------
On reflection – I actually think we could do with a site sanctioned definition of all three “Social Gatherings” in the terminology sections. At least that way, people would have both a yard stick, and a reference point.
I would also ask that people organising “chatroom style get-togethers” title their threads as such. And as meetings/meets rather than “Socials”
But please - overall – I am NOT wanting to have or start, a “Them and Us” situation.
Discuss bolt
Unknown User
Thanks for posting this. I often get confused as to what means what as people seem to be using various terms for what i think is the same thing.
My main question is are Munches the same as Socials? Because muches are described as socials here http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/terminology/munch.html and does not mention socials as an event in it's own right. It appears so to me. IE: A social gathering in a pub or pvt room etc. for people to meet without any presures.
Another confusion for me is some fuctions seem to be for more regular or experianced swingers and not new or lesserknown members.
Thnx
Freckledbird
Sex God
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/65788.html
That might help to clarify who can't attend.
Goose, munch organisers don't take experience into account when deciding who can attend. There's usually a cut-off date or a requirement that attendees are known in forum, chat or both. That's to ensure the security (as far as possible) of the other munchers. Newbies are allowed at munches but they are booked up ages in advance so socials are usually a better option as they are more frequent and smaller. Sometimes, I think that socials are better, and less intimidating, than a munch.
Unknown User
Thank you goose.
Your post alone tells me I was right to at least bring it up.
Although I've posted the thread, there was some calming influence from my right ( wink ) and I have been talking via PM to other people.
Unknown User
Thank ya both thats helped.
Unknown User
Quote by Freckledbird
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/65788.html
That might help to clarify who can't attend.

I tried to cover that here . . .
. . . . and who is allowed to attend. Although -the question of who is allowed to attend what is a completely whole other subject that I also believe needs to be re-addressed before very much longer – in a thread of it’s own.

My point was NOTabout banned members, more about members of other sites, but still part of what started to be called "the community"
And I really do think that's an entirely different (but linked) topic.
Freckledbird
Sex God
Apologies DB, I missed that bit of your post.
Darkfire
Sex God
Quote by goose35
Another confusion for me is some fuctions seem to be for more regular or experianced swingers and not new or lesserknown members.
Thnx

Mid-writing my rather long reply to this thread, i had to stop to answer this one Goose lol
these 'functions' (let me use that to encompass all 3 that Dammy is talking about for a sec) are not just for more regular or experienced swingers hun, they're really not. They're for everyone, and by definition are open to everyone. However ......
organisers often place 'restrictions' (not sure that's the right word) on the number of 'newbies' - and often say No to 'new newbies' (ie someone who's been registered on the site a week) purely because that 'newbie' could be anyone - journalist, author of yet another book on 'swinging' etc etc - or, as we see often on a weekly basis , someone who really just doesnt 'get' what 'swinging' is - we've all seen the quick-shag-brigade mentality .... what would happen if someone with that way of thinking, someone who thinks that 'swinging' means you're an easy lay, you're gagging for it and welcome attention "well she must do, she's a swinger and she's here at the 'function" - and decides to cop a feel, doesnt understand how things work, and that No means No ?
I'm coming back to this, someone keep my seat warm wink
Unknown User
Quote by Darkfire
and often say No to 'new newbies' (ie someone who's been registered on the site a week) purely because that 'newbie' could be anyone - journalist, author of yet another book on 'swinging' etc etc - or, as we see often on a weekly basis , someone who really just doesnt 'get' what 'swinging' is - we've all seen the quick-shag-brigade mentality .... what would happen if someone with that way of thinking, someone who thinks that 'swinging' means you're an easy lay, you're gagging for it and welcome attention "well she must do, she's a swinger and she's here at the 'function" - and decides to cop a feel, doesnt understand how things work, and that No means No ?

Although slightly sidetracking, I think that's ^ ^ ^ the more relevant reason.
There's more chance of me beimg a journo at a Munch than a "newbie"
(I don't think I've ever said that outloud before)
Unknown User
Quote by Darkfire

Another confusion for me is some fuctions seem to be for more regular or experianced swingers and not new or lesserknown members.
Thnx

Mid-writing my rather long reply to this thread, i had to stop to answer this one Goose lol
these 'functions' (let me use that to encompass all 3 that Dammy is talking about for a sec) are not just for more regular or experienced swingers hun, they're really not. They're for everyone, and by definition are open to everyone. However ......
organisers often place 'restrictions' (not sure that's the right word) on the number of 'newbies' - and often say No to 'new newbies' (ie someone who's been registered on the site a week) purely because that 'newbie' could be anyone - journalist, author of yet another book on 'swinging' etc etc - or, as we see often on a weekly basis , someone who really just doesnt 'get' what 'swinging' is - we've all seen the quick-shag-brigade mentality .... what would happen if someone with that way of thinking, someone who thinks that 'swinging' means you're an easy lay, you're gagging for it and welcome attention "well she must do, she's a swinger and she's here at the 'function" - and decides to cop a feel, doesnt understand how things work, and that No means No ?
I'm coming back to this, someone keep my seat warm wink
100% agree on that point DF.
I wasnt realy thinking about very new newbies more ppl like my self with a few hundred post and no meets with any other members (which i'm unable to do at the moment) to verify my status. But freckles post helped clarify that.
I did enquire about a gathering on the LMU though i coulnt atted that particular event but would i be allowed to go if i could and the reply was yes.
Firelizard
Sex God
Quote by Darkfire

Another confusion for me is some fuctions seem to be for more regular or experianced swingers and not new or lesserknown members.
Thnx

Mid-writing my rather long reply to this thread, i had to stop to answer this one Goose lol
these 'functions' (let me use that to encompass all 3 that Dammy is talking about for a sec) are not just for more regular or experienced swingers hun, they're really not. They're for everyone, and by definition are open to everyone. However ......
organisers often place 'restrictions' (not sure that's the right word) on the number of 'newbies' - and often say No to 'new newbies' (ie someone who's been registered on the site a week) purely because that 'newbie' could be anyone - journalist, author of yet another book on 'swinging' etc etc - or, as we see often on a weekly basis , someone who really just doesnt 'get' what 'swinging' is - we've all seen the quick-shag-brigade mentality .... what would happen if someone with that way of thinking, someone who thinks that 'swinging' means you're an easy lay, you're gagging for it and welcome attention "well she must do, she's a swinger and she's here at the 'function" - and decides to cop a feel, doesnt understand how things work, and that No means No ?
I'm coming back to this, someone keep my seat warmwink
smackbottom :smackbottom: :smackbottom: :smackbottom: :smackbottom: :smackbottom:
There you go hun
Stormwalker Happy to help :twisted:
Freckledbird
Sex God
Quote by goose35
... to verify my status. ..
.

Oooooooooooooooooo he said the 'V' word :shock: lol
Unknown User
Quote by Freckledbird

... to verify my status. ..
.

Oooooooooooooooooo he said the 'V' word :shock: lol
Oops sorry
Twas not meant in an official sense.
Unknown User
My main point is the penultimate section labelled SOCIALS.
The rest is padding and "scene setting"
Darkfire
Sex God
Quote by dambuster
My main point is the penultimate section labelled SOCIALS.
The rest is padding and "scene setting"

yeah, so get back on topic you lot and stop skirting round the edges :jagsatwork:
rotflmao
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
I'm not going to get into the individual definitions of munches, & socials, but more what they share. They are both oppurtunities for like minded to meet up in a purely social environment.
The essense of this thread is the difference between Socials and other meets - or to put it more simply....play or no play.
And this is where it does matter. It doesn't matter which someone chooses to organise - both should be abundant on a thriving swinging site, but it does matter that there's a distinction between the two.
Dambuster said earlier that he wouldn't like to travel 20 miles to a social event to find out it was actually a quick pint then a shag. Equally if you think that you're attending a meet where there's going to be sexual activity, you're going to be pretty miffed at travelling 20 miles for a diet coke!!!
And it's also for the benefit of the organiser. At the end of the day, if you're organising a sex fest, but adsvertise it as a Social, you're only going to be disappointed if half your guest want nothing more than a drink and a chat.
So to play or not to play that is the question - it doesn't matter which as long as you make it clear
Unknown User
Quote by dambuster
SOCIALS
This seems to be where the grey area is showing itself in the forums.
I’ve always viewed posts about socials to be where maybe a dozen or so of us gather in a pub/eatery, take a couple of tables, or a corner for a few drink and a chat and giggle.
It seems to me, and I’m sure a few others, that some of the “socials” being posted are more a pre-playing “meet” to see who wants to shag who.
I’m not knocking that, I’m just saying that there should be a difference in the terminology and postings.
In the worst case scenario (for me) I wouldn’t want to go to the “trouble” of driving 20 or 30 miles for a social to find that after an hour, people start thinning out to go off shagging.
----------------------------------------------------------
On reflection – I actually think we could do with a site sanctioned definition of all three “Social Gatherings” in the terminology sections. At least that way, people would have both a yard stick, and a reference point.
I would also ask that people organising “chatroom style get-togethers” title their threads as such. And as meetings/meets rather than “Socials”
But please - overall – I am NOT wanting to have or start, a “Them and Us” situation.
Discuss bolt

I think you are correct dammie
Thats why i asked the question. In the Terminology section there is a definition for Munches but not Socials and there seems to be two differing uses for the term social which confused me. In the What is a munch section it was described as a social.
Then in the LMU the term social seem to have two uses
One being like a smaller scale munch
the other
A meet up for a drink before going elsewher like Chamelions. which i thought (before reading the what is a munch section) was a munch.
In the end i think a munch or a social should be the same thing as the term social means social as in a few beers etc. and enjoyment meeting other members. The other use of the term needs to be re-identified under a new term.
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
:therethere: Goose
I'm not surprised you're confused. I'll try to simplify it.
Anything social is purely that - i.e. the venue choice and the behaviour at the event is totally vanilla. e.g. drinks in a pub.
A munch is a site sanctioned event and therefore is open to all site members (except complete newbies) i.e. the organiser cannot say "couples & Bi fems only" or "only for people living in the midlands"
A social is at the organisers discretion as to who they invite and they can invite none site member (as long as it's not people banned from this site).
A club meet is a club meet. Although SH may orgasnise a group going to a club, the club is still open to it's regular members and thus is not exclusive to those on the invite list and is also not purely social as people will be playing in the club.
A private party/house party/private meet is where swinging activity is involved and again it is the organisers choice as to who they invite
lavabubble
Master of Sex
Being new here I just want to ask a question, the answer to which may seem glaringly obvious but I have to ask!!
In the definition of a 'munch' one of the conditions is seperate toilet facilities. Now, I am just wondering why this is, and please don't shoot me down for not knowing.
My assumptions, playing devils advocate, would be that there would possibly be 'activities' going on in there that would be unfit for non-swinging consumption or that the dress code for a munch is different to that of a social and again that it would not be appropriate to be dressed this way in front of the vanilla customers. Alternatively, is this genuinely just for privacy of the attendees??? If anyone could shed some light in this I would be grateful as me and the missus would like to start attending these events (and have our names down for a 'social' already) but aren't quite sure what to expect of a munch!
HornyLittleBlonde
Sex God
Quote by lavabubble
Alternatively, is this genuinely just for privacy of the attendees???!

:thumbup:
That's precisely it. It isn't just separate toilet facilities it's a separate room, separate bar - a completely separate area.
The aim is just so that we are complete segregated from any vanillas - not because there's any sexual activity because there isn't. It's just so everyone can relax and talk and flirt without having to worry about prying eyes or feeling like they're in a goldfish bowl
Unknown User
Quote by HornyLittleBlonde
Alternatively, is this genuinely just for privacy of the attendees???!

:thumbup:
That's precisely it. It isn't just separate toilet facilities it's a separate room, separate bar - a completely separate area.
The aim is just so that we are complete segregated from any vanilla - not because there's any sexual activity because there isn't. It's just so everyone can relax and talk and flirt without having to worry about prying eyes or feeling like they're in a goldfish bowl
and from a security of members point of view . . . . . .
To reduce the opportunity and occurrence of vanillas thinking we're all "fair game" and copping a feel (at the very least)
lavabubble
Master of Sex
Quote by dambuster
To reduce the opportunity and occurrence of vanillas ................ copping a feel (at the very least)

Dammit :P (just joking btw)
Thanks guys, thats cleared that up, we're really looking forward to our first social and then our first munch, whenever we become eligible!!!
Darkfire
Sex God
I voted Yes. It matters.
Quote by dambuster
Why does it matter ?

It matters, because an essential ethos of this lifestyle is knowing where you stand and what to expect – it’s about informed choice and informed consent and communication of boundaries/ expectation and ‘agenda’ between all parties.
There is an element of etiquette, an acceptable or ‘right’ way of going about things, there are norms and values, and there is protocol – just as there is in every community, swinging or vanilla, the world over.
Here, the issue is about what is a Social, and what isnt.
Dambuster wrote:
It seems to me, and I’m sure a few others, that some of the “socials” being posted are more a pre-playing “meet” to see who wants to shag who.
I’m not knocking that, I’m just saying that there should be a difference in the terminology and postings.
In the worst case scenario (for me) I wouldn’t want to go to the “trouble” of driving 20 or 30 miles for a social to find that after an hour, people start thinning out to go off shagging.

Worst case scenario, for me, would be to hear people here speaking of socials being “where maybe a dozen or so of us gather in a pub/eatery, take a couple of tables, or a corner for a few drink and a chat and giggle“ and on thinking that 'that sounds like a nice steady introduction to some of the people I see posting'... turn up to say hello and generally natter to people who might be able to answer some questions for me, make me feel welcome, see that they don’t have two heads or anything and spend a little time in the company of real people not online personalities……. and the night progressing discovering that there is a certain expectation of going back to someone’s house, perhaps some ‘pairing up’ and agenda toward the end of the evening :shock:
I went to my first social with the impression that I’d have a few drinks, put some faces to names and find out a bit more about both the people and the ‘scene’ - and that’s exactly what happened. If anyone had’ve ‘come onto’ me, indicated that there was any agenda other than purely social – I’d have been out of there like a shot and probably never come back – because I ‘knew’ what social meant and had that clear in my head – if anyone had’ve pushed the boundaries of that, it would have affected my entire outlook of the scene, and I’d have disappeared or at least had severe reservations about getting involved further.
....I would also ask that people organising “chatroom style get-togethers” title their threads as such. And as meetings/meets rather than “Socials”

Many moons ago, I used a chat program with multiple rooms, one of which I moderated/ owned, before I ever discovered this and other sites. We had ‘room meets’ – nights out like our SH Munches, and also weekends in hotels where room users from all over the country would get together, socially, and if more happened, it happened. We knew that, and went with that 'expectation'. I’m in agreement here – if ‘socials’ that are primarily for chatroom users, or users of a particular room, I think it should state that, by way of being termed a ‘room meet’ – not a ‘social’.
But please - overall – I am NOT wanting to have or start, a “Them and Us” situation.

I think that’s going to be very difficult, imo, Socials and munches used to be (should be) for all site members, with a mix of both forumites and chatroomers attending. I’ve also been to a Munch where it was noticeable that ‘chatters’ sat on one side of the room with people they knew, and forumites on the other with people they knew. More recently, I've had my request to attend a 'social' geared toward chatroom users ignored.
We’ve progressed from that to a situation where some... 'socials'... are geared primarily for chatroom users by chatroom users. That in itself is very divisive, and I have to say Dammy that this thread has been needed for a while , and if you're gonna take it on the chin luv, i'll stand next to you and take it too :thumbup:
westerross
Sex God
I must say I hadn't noticed a trend for socials to be a label for playing but that may just be me.
The distinction between a munch and a social to my mind is that a social should be indiscernable from a group of friends getting together fer a night out.
A munch, despite the fact that there is no playing is an event where people like to dress up a bit sexier and have a bluddy good flirt without causing comment from vanillas nearby. For example you'd want to be able to put on yer red fishnet hold-ups and edible thong in a munch but it might not go down too well in a social.
If you want to play then that happens outside either event!!
Oh and yes it matters!
Unknown User
Something I have noticed (whilst prowling) is the amount of 'socials' being organised through the chatrooms. They seem to be organised within a week or two - which could be a positive thing, compared to the traditional munch which you needed to get your name down 6 months in advance. However.... the worrying thing is the amount of details openly discussed in there for all and sundry to note.
There is obviously wide ranging use of the term 'social' in the chatrooms - judging by the conversations that go on. I can see how sooner or later (as dammy stated) people will turn up for what they thought was one thing and find out it is something totally different. I have even observed the term 'munch' being used to describe what I would call a 'full-play party'.
Whilst I voted 'yes', to be quite frank... I am not sure some of the people organising some of these 'socials' will give a shit what forum users (or even admin) define as a 'socials' - after all, they have their motives for organising them.
westerross
Sex God
Quote by PoloLady
Something I have noticed (whilst prowling) is the amount of 'socials' being organised through the chatrooms. They seem to be organised within a week or two - which could be a positive thing, compared to the traditional munch which you needed to get your name down 6 months in advance. However.... the worrying thing is the amount of details openly discussed in there for all and sundry to note.
There is obviously wide ranging use of the term 'social' in the chatrooms - judging by the conversations that go on. I can see how sooner or later (as dammy stated) people will turn up for what they thought was one thing and find out it is something totally different. I have even observed the term 'munch' being used to describe what I would call a 'full-play party'.
Whilst I voted 'yes', to be quite frank... I am not sure some of the people organising some of these 'socials' will give a shit what forum users (or even admin) define as a 'socials' - after all, they have their motives for organising them.

The trite answer to this is 'Don't go to any 'socials/munches' organised in the chatroom'. Having said that, 6 months ago, I'd have said 'You don't want to go in the chatroom for anything meaningful' but I find myself drifting in there more and more lately.
So things change don't they and I guess we've got to assess risks etc at every decision point. The important thing is to have an environment where all the facts are to hand in order to make that call. Hence the need for some common understanding.
Darkfire
Sex God
Quote by PoloLady
Something I have noticed (whilst prowling) is the amount of 'socials' being organised through the chatrooms. They seem to be organised within a week or two - which could be a positive thing, compared to the traditional munch which you needed to get your name down 6 months in advance. However.... the worrying thing is the amount of details openly discussed in there for all and sundry to note.

:thumbup:
There is obviously wide ranging use of the term 'social' in the chatrooms - judging by the conversations that go on. I can see how sooner or later (as dammy stated) people will turn up for what they thought was one thing and find out it is something totally different. I have even observed the term 'munch' being used to describe what I would call a 'full-play party'.

( :shock: you sit quietly at the bottom of the rooms taking it all in too? I'm not on my own then! : )
:thumbup: and that, in part, I feel is what has started this. Recently I have seen Munches described as parties (its taking me a while in this thread because I am actually trawling back through posts so I can back up what I'm saying, copy and paste is a wonderful thing) , socials decscribed as Munches, people talking of snogging being the SH handshake (at munches - but was discussed in a thread where actually the event attended was a social) etc etc. Now, it may well be a simple terminology mistake siad by one person - but it only takes one 'newbie' to read that, get a bit unclear about things and that's it, damage done, seed of uncertainty sown.
Whilst I voted 'yes', to be quite frank... I am not sure some of the people organising some of these 'socials' will give a shit what forum users (or even admin) define as a 'socials' - after all, they have their motives for organising them.

:thumbup: - but this may serve as a timely reminder to those new to 'socials' to simply be aware of this issue.
neilinleeds
Sex God
dammie,
i've not picked up on anything to suggest that socials are any more a kind of foreplay than munches? i think both kinds of event are increasingly being seen in that light though, and not just by newbies? if there's that impression, it most likely comes from regs referring to things like after-parties and room 101 kinda stuff in the post-munch thread, yadda yadda ya? no surprise if there's some confusion on the whole "no play" thing? ((( and yep, guilty as charged your honour! ;) )))
i think the distinction between munches and socials is useful though? munch = endorsed by, and overseen by SH? socials = independent, and more community than site based?
personally, i'd rather we left any kind of rigid definition of what constitutes a social alone, cos i think one of the main reasons why people choose to organise socials rather than munches is cos they're more flexible, and give a greater degree of control over the event tor the organiser?
was that even remotely on topic? rambling mode! ;)
neil x x x ;)
Unknown User
Dambuster.... I only have two things to say to you.......
kiss
&