Dallas Observer - Swingtown Article (Duncanville Swingers Club)

[Dan And Jennifer]

Here's a story that was forwarded to us this morning from Patrick over at the Dallas Observer. This story has been around for a while and it just won't seem to die...

Hi, I work at the Dallas Observer, and our feature story this week is about a swinger couple in suburban Dallas that's being put on trial because their home has been doubling as a party pad. It sounds like police crackdowns like this have been a major issue in some similar neighborhoods around the country, and I thought you all and your readers might be interested in the story and want to weigh in. Here's the feature:

Swingtown - News - Dallas Observerpage 1 - Dallas Observer

Of course we had to chime in and hope you will to.

While Dan and I are big proponents of protecting our freedoms and living the life we choose to live in the privacy of our own homes, I can't help but feel that this is not an issue about swingers, but an issue about running a club in a residential neighborhood.

It may have started out all in good fun, but when it gets this big, it's time to find a better venue. I have no issue with my neighbors throwing a swinger party, even every weekend, but 100 people? Stop and think about that for a minute... That's somewhere between 25 and 50 cars (minimum) lining the street in your neighborhood.

Regardless of the City of Duncanville's moral and ethical arguments, this is just too much traffic for a residential area.

Trying to make this into an issue about "Swinging" is missing the point.

My suggestion is to limit your house parties to 20 people or less!

What do YOU think?

[Wolfhowl]

I think you are correct. This isn't about swinging, it's about running a club out of ones home.

He was asking for "donations" from the men, and he also had a website to attract new members of his "Extended Family"

I hope he does open his own club, and just move it from his house to there. It would make everyone a lot happier.

[SnakeBabe]

I agree that this is beyond a private party when it affects the neighbors. Once a year the streets jammed with cars because you throw a superbowl or birthday party is fairly accepted but if you did it every weekend on my block I would get angry at you too. It has become a nuisance to the neighbors. A party of 3-4 couples could happen each week and not set off anyone.
The other side of the coin is the laws of the town wont let them open a swingers club so they cant move the party to a place away from neighbors, kids, schools etc. so what is a swinger to do? We have been forced to twist the laws to allow us to freely enjoy our sexual desires. It’s the fault of the very people who do not want this in the neighborhood this is happening. People are just too hung up on sex.
Hugs and Hissessss,
Maria
Hmmm, I wonder what side the media would take it this was a Gay/Lesbian weekly meeting?

[Dan And Jennifer]

Right on Snakebabe.

Great points... unfortunately they got me thinking and on a little rant - it's not in response to you by any means, just some thoughts.

You know we've very supportive of swinging as a personal choice (heck, we were just on prime time TV talking about swinging and how it can work for couples). But we looked at this issue and while all the buzz around it deals with swinging, we don't think that's the issue here.

To us it's like you said - an unfair disruption to the neighborhood by having super large super bowl type parties regularly. what may have begun as an occasional "house party" turned into a club by the sheer number of people coming. If you want to run a club, get a club venue; or another home where the traffic and activity doesn't inconvenience the neighbors.

Of course the "holier than thou" / "my god's better than your god" crowd picked up the fact that these people may have sex with others, so they "need to be saved!". Queue the Crusades, round 2; convert the non-believers! LOL

What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (without hurting anyone, hence consenting) is their business, and only their business. No meddling or religions-based-preference conversion required.

It is absolutely mind-boggling that in the year 2008 we're still passing laws to ban people from using sex toys in their own homes. Brought to you by the same dysfunctional thinking that had people not that long ago putting torture devices on their children's genitals to prevent sexual arousal and masturbation. Seriously, people would inflict great pain on their children because of their own ignorance dealing with sex. We did a live video segment on that, but I can't seem to find it.

Also in the year 2008 it is downright incredible that you have to drive to a literally dangerous, seedy part of town to buy sex toys - or to go to a swinger club.

And also in the year 2008 we have "sex education" programs that can't talk about condoms, seriously. The whole focus is clinical and "let's all promise to have no sex; good boys and girls". And we wonder why the teen pregnancy rate is off the charts and the STD rates are insane, more proportionally than so many other modern / "western" nations that aren't afraid of talking about sex. On that topic, for anyone that missed the live show segment we did on Sex Ed, here it is:

LIVE - Sex Education - Who's REALLY Responsible?

And to your point on gay / lesbian topics. Just a few short years ago we were running radio ads on some major Dallas radio stations. And we had to edit our commercial on one of the largest stations, because they wouldn't run it with the word "gay" in it. Seriously, not making this up.

There are still countries in the world today - not just one - where people are shot for the crime of being gay. Yes, sexual orientation. And many U.S. states still have laws on the books that allow them to prosecute people for "sodomy", i.e. getting back to what consenting adults can do in the privacy of their own homes without the government peeking under the covers to enforce one group's pseudo-moralistic religious-based agenda.

So yeah, I'm glad this at least gets people talking, even if the "swingers under fire" concept here is a bit of a straw man. Whatever, at least the hypocrisy and religious oppression (i.e. various people trying to push their religious preferences on others through laws that have ZERO value aside from religious goals) is coming to light.

Same as with the "blue laws". You don't want to drink on Sundays? Saturdays? Good for you. I respect your personal choice. And I expect you to respect my personal choice which happens to differ. My personal beliefs say nothing about having vodka on Saturday or Sunday - or even both. My choice, no "conversion" required. Those types of laws have no place in a modern society.

As we grow as a people and as a global society, slowly we'll learn to... respect one another's personal i.e. 'move along, it's none of your business') type choices. Maybe one day we'll educate our children about sex before they get pregnant at 12 and get STDs. Heck, maybe we'll even see an end to violence and killings in the name of one god or another, which always struck me as blasphemy to begin with, but that's another topic for another day.

In the meantime, perhaps we could start slow, maybe with a 12 step program, or even just a "mind your own business day" and a "pass no religious-preference-based laws" day. I'd definitely be up for celebrating both. OK, rant over.

Dan

[K. in Cleveland]

Well, I'm only one day behind on this topic, but I feel as though I'm already weeks behind..lol.
Personally, I believe this to be a 2-sided issue. The neighbors themselves are disturbed by the mass volumes of couples parking and partying in their neighborhood. They absolutely have the right to complain.... heaven forbid the neighbors want to have a party with a few friends over, there would be nowhere to park.
Now, the other side of the issue in my eyes is the suits in the city hall. Their issue is not with the parking and disturbance issues. If it were, the police would be targeting parkinc citations and noise ordinances by order of the mayor or city council or whomever has that say in that particular town. However, they are targeting the issue of swinger sex in the residential zone. The issue here being where do they have the right to enforce any rules? I've been to vanilla parties where the hosts asked for donations to help defray the costs, or ask the party goers to bring food and/or drinks again to defray the costs. In no instance that I've observed have the homeowners been cited for operating a club in a residential zone. Now, if they had alcohol and charged their guests for the distribution of said beverage, this could be considered operating a bar or saloon without a liquor license....
Anyway, the city hall suits in this case are not targeting the issue that the neighbors most likely care about, the parking and volume of traffic on their street. They are targeting the fact that this couple has a house where couples come to have sex with other couples. They care about the swinging issue because it is "not moral" or "not upright" and is probably embarassing to them that their town is famous for such sexual nature.

The residents in that area deserve to have a normal block and to be able to get into or out of their driveways without stumbling over the party-going couples' cars. They deserve the right to be able to have their own party vanilla or otherwise, and have their friends be able to park on the street. Yet, the couple who has the parties deserve the right to have sex with whomever they want... they should just get a better venue than their home. I would expect that I would face issues if I started selling hamburgers out of my home that were so delicious that people lined the streets day and night to get ahold of them....

OK, my rant is over now... btw.. I do make a mean burger...lol

[sxyNYCcpl]

I have a lot of thoughts about this, though I'm hoping this won't turn into a novel.

First, to the point of unreasonable volumes of parked cars in a residential area. Quite a valid concern, IMO. However, certainly in this case, and quite probably in many others like it throughout the country, it's being used as a convenient legal excuse. From the article in question, which was well written, and at least made something of an effort at fairness, the first complaint was indeed about parking, in September of 2007. To which the city responded, but not with parking citations, not by towing cars, or even by sending traffic control agents out to physically restrain people from parking. No, instead they responded by enacting a law, in November of 2007, against sex clubs in residences, which they have recently upgraded to a "Class A" misdemeanor which carries a possible penalty of up to a year in jail.

Yup. In these United States of America, purportedly a free country, hosting a "sex club" in your home can land you in the slammer for up to 364 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes. I haven't read the legislation, so I don't know precisely how they defined "sex club", but I'm not sure it matters. Nobody has the right to tell another person what is or is not acceptable sexual practices, most certainly not with the power of the law.

I concede that parking for this many people is likely an unreasonable burden on the neighborhood, but if parking is the problem, fix the problem. Don't use it as an excuse to attack events that occur behind closed doors about which only the participants, assuming they're all consenting adults, should have any say so about.

Secondly, the issue of running a business from a home. To me, possibly a valid concern, but not on it's face. Back to the freedom thing (I'm a true libertarian at heart, in case you hadn't figured that out), as long as the business residing within that home does not cause noticeable effects to outside observers, it's nobodies business. If and when it does, you deal with that, but simply "running a business" from a residence should not be, in and of itself, enough to trigger any kind of enforcement action.

If traffic is a problem, deal with it. Nudity, and/or sexual acts visible to outsiders? Ditto. But if I have 150 people in my home getting their freak on, while simultaneously managing to not create a traffic, noise, or erotic visual problem to anyone who is not voluntarily behind my closed doors, then nobody has the right to insist that we cease our activities.

In some cases, I think we swingers are our own worst enemies, as far too frequently I see us making and/or accepting the excuses the puritans use to persecute us. Instead of questioning the validity of requiring permission from government to make money at home, I've seen too many accept it as a valid and reasonable argument. Instead of questioning the bullshit excuses they use when the truth is the sexual aspect is what's driving their objections, we accept their excuses.

Sorry for the rant, especially as my first post on this board. I've visited this site before though I haven't had an excuse to sign up. Now that I'm here, well I'm here.

I welcome thoughts and feedback.

[Dan And Jennifer]

Hi sxyNYCcpl, just wanted to say welcome - those are some awesome points and I think you guys are spot on.

Just like with the Craigslist censorship of "erotic services" mess yesterday, if you have a particular issue, go after that one.

I completely agree that you shouldn't have 100 cars in a residential neighborhood that doesn't have the space for them, and you shouldn't run a noisy club in a private neighborhood - but trying to push a pseudo-moralistic religious based agenda on anyone is absolutely wrong - and ignorant.

I'm just glad to see that it IS getting better. If you look back in history, there has never been a more tolerant time for differing beliefs and perspectives. Sure we have hypocrites and extremists, plenty of them, on all sides, we are definitely growing and evolving as a society - and learning to respect one another's personal choices. Slowly but surely.

I believe the gay marriage constitution change in California recently was a step backwards, but so is progress... some steps forward, some back... as long as you're going forward in the long run.

Also many states are realizing the stupidity of having sex toys be illegal, and those laws are being struck down. Have faith, and keep fighting the good fight. We do. Every day.

Hope to see you join in some of the other discussions here, I think you'd have some great things to add to some of the topics in the Censorship & Sexual Repression forum... like the Sex Ed question, or even the the ever controversial "should women be allowed by law to show their breasts in public?", and of course... "should prostitution be legal?"

[sxyNYCcpl]

Originally Posted by Dan And Jennifer

Also many states are realizing the stupidity of having sex toys be illegal, and those laws are being struck down. Have faith, and keep fighting the good fight. We do. Every day.

Didn't Lawrence v. Texas render any not already repealed laws against sex toys as moot?