What to do, what to do …
For the last few months FITS has been chasing down a number of tips related to the existence of a high-profile “swingers” group in the Palmetto state – one that we have recently confirmed includes several influential members of the state’s political and media elite.
(And no, contrary to the rumors floating around out there our founding editor is not one of the participants … nor is our state’s famous “Army Wife“).
For those of you not hip to the term, “swingers” aren’t playground enthusiasts, they are practitioners of polyamory – i.e. people who have consensual sexual relations with multiple partners (often at the same time and often in group settings). An estimated 4 million Americans reportedly practice “swinging” – a.k.a. “the lifestyle” – while millions more have tried it (or something resembling “it”) at least once.
So how should we handle the sensitive information we’ve obtained?
On the one hand, breaking this story has the potential to generate huge amounts of traffic to our website. On the other hand we don’t begrudge anyone for the choices they make behind closed doors – and absent the presence of some blatant hypocrisy or concurrent traditional scandal (i.e. “Bridget Keeney“), we see no reason to write about this group.
Ironically, though, over the course of our investigation one of the group’s members – an avid FITS reader – volunteered to become our new sex columnist (anonymously, of course).
We’re taking that offer – and everything related to this story – under advisement.
In the meantime feel free to let us know if you think we’re making the right decision by declining (at least for now) to run the story.
***
By Edward Gray March 14, 2011 at 11:24 am
I think its good. People will go to the website looking for smut and might actually be exposed to some real stories.
By Chris March 14, 2011 at 11:34 am
I say you should give hints – don’t reveal their names yet, but to generate even more traffic and suspense you should simply release hints. In fact, you may never have to release their names, just keep giving good hints and everyone will figure it out on their own. It’s more fun that way.
By Alphonse March 14, 2011 at 11:43 am
What to do? Post their names and perhaps some “undercover” pictures. Winning!
By fitsnews March 14, 2011 at 11:53 am
Tiger Blood!
By Tom Stickler March 14, 2011 at 11:55 am
Shit, don’t go all Charlie Sheen on us!
By Good times!!! March 14, 2011 at 11:58 am
I can confirm that there are swingers active in the real estate business in the Upstate and have the photos to prove it.
By Coastal Observer March 14, 2011 at 12:03 pm
Supposedly that place near Fort Jackson is loaded up with them. All high profile people too. At least that’s what we hear down this way.
By That Boz Guy @ The Beach March 14, 2011 at 12:08 pm
I’m from Myrtle Beach. That does not shock me. Nor would an expose of the amount of blow snorted in the locker rooms of The Dunes Club down here, or on the yatchs of some of our political and civc “leaders”, “silent” and otherwise.
The grotesque hypocrisy of supposedly morally-superious Republicans may still titillate in the state at large (as evidenced by all the traffic you’ve benerated with the stories on Sanford’s confiremed infidelities and Haley’s still-alleged ones).
If you were willing to use this to tell the truth about everyone involved on a equal basis,
By cash March 14, 2011 at 12:10 pm
Yes, hints would be the way to go. Hints will generate big traffic.
By Soft Sigh from Hell March 14, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Yeah, hints! Play with it. Perhaps you already are.
Allude to a faculty senate in one of our many colleges. Or a Teabag group in the Upstate. Or a “Friends of the XYZ” group, of which we have many.
“The iniquitous ‘Wednesday night prayer fellowship’ in one of the most venerable edifices in our state.”
“The XYZ Breeders Club of a Pee Dee county.”
Mention lab coats, stethoscopes, riding crops, stock trading via texting while in flagrante delicto.
Laugh about “the best-equipped dentist” in the state (from MASH naturally).
Mix in some true ones of course.
By cash March 14, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Are you sure “her excellency” is not a swinger? Seems she would fit that profile.
By cash March 14, 2011 at 12:26 pm
Time for the first hint.
By That Boz Guy @ The Beach March 14, 2011 at 12:27 pm
As I was saying before going spastic and cutting myself off … If you were willing to use this to tell the truth about everyone involved on a equal basis, that would be one thing.
If, on the other had, you were to use it only as another wedge issue to only go after those you consider “RINO’s”, or whomever you consider fair game because you hate their asses and they hate your, I’d say you were meeting the sorry expectations of those who think you’re simply being the bush-league Larry Flynt of the right, or the blogging world’s nascent equivalent of Rupert Murdock’s tabloid-based take-down machine with a punkish attitude … and basically being all that you should be if you want your legacy to merely be that of a dirty trickster and black ops specialist of the Starboard Communications ilk, but one who can actually keep a site up and running for more than a few months and get national exposure for it in all media.
I see your quandary. And raise you a conundrum.
Other than hits, FITS, where is the honor in the? Where is the principle? … for anyone other than a Ferenge?
Probably will made some damn juicy reading though!
By gomez March 14, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Please please please let this be the first of many Wild Swinging People Alerts.
By cash March 14, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Could it be Nathan?
By That Boz Guy @ The Beach March 14, 2011 at 12:47 pm
http://www.tvacres.com/aliens_ferengi.htm
Hmmm … I’m wondering how Net Neutrality would impact on adhereance to the Rules of Acquisition?
After all … what profiteth a Ferengi to lose his own soul, and gaineth not a profit?
And finally (I do mean it, I don’t want to wear our your warm hospitality, so this is my absolute last post here today, barring breaking news of perp walks by the Coastal Kickback gang) there’s this:
/// If you were willing to use this to tell the truth about everyone involved on a equal basis, that would be one thing. ///
Didn’t think that one through, obviously. That would actually suck ginormous diseased donkey dicks, because it would mean that you were just being a total moralistic twat… and we’d have to bring in Charley Sheen and his Goddesses for an intervention.
By Alabaster II March 14, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Why is That Boz Guy so worried? Does he know something?
By Your Boy Blue March 14, 2011 at 1:35 pm
There have been rumours around Columbia for years that the swinging lifestyle is rampant in the King’s Grant neighborhood. Kinda creepy crowd over there, so it very well may be true.
By Michael P. March 14, 2011 at 1:42 pm
The crazy thing is this is probably an all male swinger’s club.
By Michael P. March 14, 2011 at 1:43 pm
I wonder if Jakie Knotts is on that list?
By JasmineGld March 14, 2011 at 1:48 pm
Thank you for declining to run the story. People deserve the right to consent before their private life is aired in the media.
BTW, polyamory and swinging are different. Polyamory generally allows for emotional relationships with more than one partner, while swinging requires emotional exclusivity between two partnered individuals. There’s some overlap in the middle.
For more information, check out:
polyamory — Loving More
swinging — The Swingers Board
By inletman March 14, 2011 at 2:00 pm
Swingers are every where. In the Bethesda Md. area they recruit on the street. Let it go.
By Funny March 14, 2011 at 2:08 pm
I think the decision comes down to whether you are trying to be strictly a “news outlet” or something beyond that.
I think I remember you guys saying you don’t want to be labeled as any type of news outlet. If that’s the case why withold anything?(like the lamestream media would)
Certainly no one gave you that courtesy Will when other “outlets” threatened you with the Nikki stuff…and while it might have helped your site short term I’m guessing that if it could’ve remained under wraps you’d have preferred it.
I say let it loose…your site equally informs and appalls and I think that has been your success…new boundries and all.
I agree with many above that the best way to do it is make a game out of it, releasing little bits at a time to build up readership and shake a lot of people up. For those pols who have been living the swinger lifestyle…imagine the torture of not knowing whether it’s your name or not on “the list”….lmao…sounds like good fun to me.
These pols that go into office to run everyone’s life should understand going in one of the pitfalls of doing so…they do so giving up privacy for “public life”(or “service”).
By OhNoNotAgain March 14, 2011 at 2:27 pm
They’ve had a swingers club in Fort Mill for more than a decade now.
By fitsnews March 14, 2011 at 2:53 pm
“Funny,”
Actually we are glad that the Nikki stuff blew up.
Our website has survived, and her decision to launch a full-on smear campaign against our founding editor has freed our hand in assessing her recent status quo whore-dom.
Obviously we hope that we would have been every bit as aggressive in calling Nikki out had the scandal not erupted, but the antagonistic relationship certainly made it easier for us to do our jobs.
-FITS
By cash March 14, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Let it rip and gett’er done.
By Pondering the Pitfalls March 14, 2011 at 3:37 pm
I’m surprised that I haven’t seen this thought posted yet:
Blackmail.
Am I the only guy old enough to remember Operation Lost Trust? The FBI came in and arrested a couple of legislators for accepting cash for votes. What if one of our “elected elite” were blackmailed into passing some law because they didn’t want the “moral majority” discovering their fondness for lots of fondness?
By cash March 14, 2011 at 3:40 pm
Any idea on the identity of that “elected elite”? Let’s throw some names out there.
By Palmetto Pulse March 14, 2011 at 4:02 pm
Calling names just to call names doesn’t seem respectable but if it’s news…well, you are a news outlet. I’d love to hear the details albeit with fictional names.
By cash March 14, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Could it be someone like Joe Wilson?
By Trailer Trash March 14, 2011 at 4:14 pm
Did Fits just refer to Governor Haley as a whore?
Dude!
By good point March 14, 2011 at 4:24 pm
In its use, it appears “whore-dom” is actually being used as a verb…as in her actions. I’m no grammar expert though so maybe one of those highly paid USC or Lexington 5 teachers can chime in and tell us.
Then I’ll finally feel like I’m getting my tax dollars worth. :)
It’s a strangely worded sentence but I just don’t see an adjective there…maybe an adverb?
By cash March 14, 2011 at 4:45 pm
Whoredom is a noun. Whoredom is the practicing of whoring. A whore of a promiscuous or immoral woman who engages in sexual acts with many. Now, we know of two, although more have been alledged. Just how many married men are afraid to come forward? My guess would be a few.
By Tom March 14, 2011 at 4:55 pm
I just want to know if Strom Thurmond was ever a member?
By jim lewis March 14, 2011 at 5:02 pm
Rumor has it that Leatherhead,s code name is Caligula. When Fat Boy Poncho Knotts knocks on the door and the peep hole is unpeeped, he is hailed as Bacchus. His faithful sidekick, Little Cisco Bauer, is Hadrian.
By Ivo March 14, 2011 at 5:38 pm
I think you should use the term “polyamory” properly.
By Lance Riprock March 14, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Are you saying it’s okay with Michael Haley for other men to shuck his corn?
By fitsnews March 14, 2011 at 5:47 pm
How about polyfucking?
By Lance Riprock March 14, 2011 at 6:01 pm
We used to call it “sharing the wealth”; let’s not be crude. After all though, you can’t wear one out; I wish I had tires made out of it. But, how about Michael? Is he(was he?) down with it?
By eggaday March 14, 2011 at 6:29 pm
are these people conservatives because if they are, it changes the meaning of the word
By Facrebel March 14, 2011 at 6:55 pm
You need to connect the dots…
The innovation and medical crowd is
into this kinda action.
Ever wondered what happens at educrat
parties? Check out some of the ladies of
our educrat elite and you’ll see what I mean.
By Old Bike Dude March 14, 2011 at 7:33 pm
OK give me a minute here on the terminology thing. Let’s say you’ve got a pol who is married but is constantly away on the weekends with “his boys”. If it turned out that he was plowing mud would he be considered a swinger?
By MillerMan March 14, 2011 at 9:29 pm
Good times, mind telling me how you managed to get in the door with the realtors?
Mike P, when we’re talking Jakie, it’s not a swingers cllub, it’s a pig pen.
By Billy March 14, 2011 at 9:30 pm
Will, are you jealous because they wouldn’t let you in? Outing for revenge is a very petty thing, you know?
By Mike at the Beach March 15, 2011 at 12:10 am
OBD,
I just threw up in my mouth a little…
By MajorC March 15, 2011 at 1:23 am
I find it amazing that Will Folks has suddenly *discovered* a “swingers” group in S.C. OMG! Were we all under a rock before FITS came along? You sound like a dude telling his sister that he just discovered their parents smoked pot during the ’70′s. Man, you need to come out from under those Nikki boy-short panties that you have had over your head for the last year.
When I came to Columbia in the mid 1980′s I bumped into the swingers crowd then. A fine chapter consisting of many USC professors and their spouses. All during the ’90′s when the internet took off, the “swinging” crowd in Columbia advertised their theme parties monthly. You would get the official invitation the night before revealing which hotel banquet room was booked for the party. Of course the real party began later upstairs in a few rented suites.
However, the best times to be had (1980′s) were with all the politicians at the old Town House. There was a madam from Greenville who supplied the “escorts” and a construction equipment dealer who even had a helicopter that would fly you out to the big house in the country. Strip shows with all the girls made Penthouse look like a a Good Housekeeping Magazine.
The big thing now is the transvestite beauty pageants with participants coming in from all over the state. You would be surprised who attends these. Why go to Madi Gras when we have it all right here in Columbia? Will, if you want to smoke a few cigars with the big dogs come off the porch and give me a call. We will pretend that we want to invest in some real estate out in King’s Grant. Later we will drop by the “all white” country club and I’ll point out whose bird dog is ready to hunt!
(maybe I should write me a book, too. Of course, I would change the names to protect the innocent)
By Connor March 15, 2011 at 1:58 am
Let me make this very very clear: Polyamory is NOT swinging! Please take a moment (literally, like 3 seconds) to do even the most basic wikipedia search on the two terms.
Night and day folks.
By Soft Sigh from Hell March 15, 2011 at 8:33 am
“A scattering of judicial robes, with occasional rappings of gavel, and I swear to god I saw a mortar-board hat and at least one barrister’s wig. Upper class iniquity, low country style! Hard and fast sin in the Holy of Cities! And then the lights went out–not unexpectedly it seems–with soon a barnyard of grunting.”
Next up, Risking Perdition in the Great Pee Dee Region.
Bridgett maybe can handle the Bible Belt upstate.
By Shanky March 15, 2011 at 8:53 am
Bravo FITS, on the honesty point anyway, the blonde right looks familiar… oops, uhh we are all for you not publishing anything on this not that we care, just sayin.
Pingback: High Profile SC Swingers - The Swingers Board
By Transparency March 15, 2011 at 9:44 am
Just go to swingerslifestyle.com, get a free membership for a week, and you will see them. Also, they are in Swappernet.com.
By Transparency March 15, 2011 at 11:00 am
They can be seen at Playfulswingers.com also.
By Jim Catano March 15, 2011 at 11:04 am
If you do run the story, consider dividing it into two parts as you mention two forms of non-monogamy that are distinct and separate yet you conflate them into one. Swinging is NOT polyamory. Both involve consensual intimate relationships involving more than just one partner, but swinging often involves brief and casual hook-ups that may even by anonymous. Polyamorists strive for long-term caring relationships which many swingers regard as threatening to their marriage or main relationship. Outside sexual encounters for swingers are regarded as diversions and recreational and in some cases “necessary evils” to provide the spice missing in one’s “real” relationship.
The link I provide is to an article I wrote on polyamory for a current Catalyst Magazine, a Utah alternative monthly. It clearly differentiates the swinging and polyamory and the graph we used is very helpful in understanding all the various forms of non-monogamy. It’s a bit difficult to use the reader. After clicking on the “click to read” button, wait a few second for it the file to load. Then use your mouse wheel to size the print so you can read it and you move around using your mouse without clicking buttons. Turn the pages by clicking on the side arrows.
By Transparency March 15, 2011 at 11:04 am
They are most visible on swinglifestyle.com. This site offers a free week membership to couples. Once on, the mentioned offenders, the pics can be seen.
By MajorC March 15, 2011 at 11:17 am
Soft Sigh, I thought I saw you kissing in the garden of good and evil, but perhaps you were only whispering into his mouth…
By Transparency March 15, 2011 at 12:24 pm
Let’s not forget the Mothership: carolinafriends.com
By Soft Sigh from Hell March 15, 2011 at 1:46 pm
“A sea of tractor hats, on male and female alike–John Deere, Massey-Ferguson, IH of course, even a Minneapolis-Moline. It was going to be “down on the farm” style tonight! Not a NASCAR in sight, which must have been specified in this region of rolling thunder. I guess “going full bore” can only be a few times per year. Lower down, the habiliments ran the range from Junior Sample “bibs” to Daisy Dukes shorts, with not a rare suspender here and there. Plus a few sets of threads that might have been veterinarian and 4-H leader and county agent attire, whether actual or feigned. There might even have been a preacher or two. T’would be a night of battalion-scale boinking on the banks of the Great Pee Dee! Though they split into companies for smaller-unit action: “laying in of the leaf,” “turning the furrow,” “middle busting,” “side dressing,” and, may god be my witness, something called “coultering.” Words fail at what followed. Please see the attached photos. NSFW, not safe for your soul; you may want a Bible at your side when you witness them.”
By Larry Merchant March 15, 2011 at 2:12 pm
There’s just not very much to do around here, except screw.
By Taurnil Tinuviel March 15, 2011 at 7:37 pm
WRONG!!! “Swingers” and polyamorists are two, distinctive animals. Swingers are into SEX. Period. With anyone who shows up basically. Polyamory is about LOVE; the sex is incidental. Polyamorists generally have long term relationships; best friends with benefits, if you will. Swingers may never see the person(s) they have sex with again. Writers should be a little more careful with their research before making stupid, broadstroke equations.
Swinging is not polyamory. Polyamory is not swinging. Get it right.
By Real Housewife of Irmo March 15, 2011 at 8:11 pm
FITS do tell!
By CoolAireHeights March 15, 2011 at 8:32 pm
Geez people, we get it! Swinging is not polyamory. Polyamory is not swinging. Clearly it appears that you little porkers are just trying to polish a turd (your guilt) by calling it Polyamory. But why? Frankly, neither I – nor likely the rest of the civilized world – give a sh!t who you screw or why you screw them… so long as this arrangement is consensual. So please, just STFU already!
By Soft Sigh from Hell March 15, 2011 at 8:58 pm
“Geez people, we get it!”
I’ll bet there is an analogous taxonomic lecture from NAMBLA that thank god we are spared here.
By CoolAireHeights March 15, 2011 at 9:33 pm
… oh, and given that reference to NAMBLA above (yeah I’d never heard of this group; but, when I looked up, I nearly puked), let’s amend my above comment to mean both consensual and (of course) of legal age.
By Lee March 15, 2011 at 9:46 pm
Contrary to what some believe, swingers will not have sex with “anyone that shows up”. Anyone that believes that has been watching to many movies.
For what ever reason, you took the time to research these people and now you feel you have the “goods” on them. Unless they are hypocrites about peoples personal lives then there is no reason to even take interest in their personal lives.
To many want hints because they have no life of their own and want to trash the personal lives of others. (Hypocrites)
File the info, use it only of those you have FACTS on try to limit the personal lives of others.
Let the rest keep guessing because they have nothing better to do.
By JustJss March 18, 2011 at 12:26 pm
By my last count, approximately 7 percent of adult South Carolinans (Carolinians?) are/were registered members of adultfriendfinder.com, the world’s largest online swinger community.
By Lucius Scribbens March 23, 2011 at 7:38 pm
Don’t confuse swingers with polyamory. Although they both incorporate an open relationship status, swinging has to do with recreational sex with others besides your spouse/primary partner where polyamory, though it includes sex in most cases is about having another romantic and loving relationship with someone AND your spouse/primary partner.
So you see: same but different.
By David T. April 3, 2011 at 10:48 am
Quite a non-story this one. If there was a way to do actual research you’d probably find that maybe 5% of all income levels and professions are swingers.
So obviously that would end up including some public figures. Just based on the law of averages.
S.C. and N.C. for that matter have a vibrant, active swinging community..as well as BDSM/Fetish and *gasp* GLBT communities.
The question is…why intrude into the lives of public figures for “TMZ” style non-news such as what they do (and newsflash..99.9% of all kinky sex ain’t illegal) in their own private lives.
-David T.
http://www.carolinaswinger.net
http://www.spicecarolinas.com