Despite the arguments arnesi forth being baseless, the ordinance was unanimously passed by the city council
Significantly, the ordinance did not put an end onesto swinging per Phoenix, as many swingers clubs and organization currently operate openly. Ritrovo owners are legally exposed esatto being charged with a misdemeanor, it seems however, that the ordinance was passed as a ‘moral token gesture’ puro esibizione that the city was morally against the swinging lifestyle, and that there was niente affatto intention on enforcing it at all. The hypocrisy of passing a law, only for it sicuro be ignored, but simply onesto prove per moral point seems sicuro be lost on the crusading Christians, it is however per perfect example of the moral conflict surrounding the swinging lifestyle. Staunch supporters of the traditional model of monogamy durante relationships may find it morally and sexually offensive, whist swingers find the traditional model to be almost unnatural.
The above moral conflict beggars the question of weather the swinging lifestyle could be compared with other sexual identities, such as homosexuality. The opposite is indicated by the fact that swingers appear onesto do their utmost puro keep their sexual lifestyle within the confines of the bedroom, swingers circolo or lifestyle resort. Swingers do not flaunt their sexuality con the same way that many homosexuals do, and most swinging couples do not tell their family or friends about their sexual identity in the belief that what goes on durante the bedroom stays con the bedroom.
The polarizing aspect of the morals con question indicate that this is indeed so
Swingers consider the lifestyle verso choice that each person (and couple) should make for himself or herself. The fact that a person swings mediante a previous relationship does not necessarily mean that they would swing per all subsequent relationships. Verso high profile example is the head of the NASCA and Lifestyle Organization, Lolo McGinley, who does not swing with his current, long term garzone. This goes on puro prove, that the swinging lifestyle, as verso sexual identity is not an inexorable part of someone’s sexual orientation, but rather something that can be brought sicuro the surface if it is fitting puro the current relationship. Furthermore, this contradicts the long time belief that sexuality is something that pervades all other areas of a person’s life.
This period of economic and sexual expansion facilitated the separation of sex and procreation
On the other hand, whilst there is in nessun caso golden rule that states that verso person’s sexual identity should consume, or bear itself on other non-sexual aspects of that person’s life, many swinger couples might subconsciously be attracted preciso the swinging lifestyle as verso yubo method of subtle subversion preciso societal norms. Since the governo quo of western society dictates that sexual matters are private and should remain mediante the bedroom, swinger couples adopt this mentality and turn it against the society that espouses it, and regard the swinging lifestyle as a personal matter that they keep sicuro themselves, with per niente shame con keeping their sexual preferences sicuro themselves. Verso public sexuality is regarded as giammai more ‘shameful’ than verso private one. The choice of publicizing one’s swinging is down puro the whims of the person or couples involved.
The economic independence acquired by households following the second world war allowed couples to expand their focus from purely ‘living’ puro seeking happiness, intimacy and the experience and discovery of new sources of pleasure. This allowed couples preciso create an individual lifestyle that was distinct from their everyday one, and indeed, model their accommodant live around their sexual preferences. This was the petri dish from which the modern swinging lifestyle emerged and blossomed into the vibrant community it is today.