The paper “Group Sex as Play: Rules and Transgression in Shared Non-Monogamy” by J. Tuomas Harviainen and Katherine Frank approaches its topic from the angle of game studies. At its core, the article argues that group sex, as practiced at recreational group sex events (hereafter “GSE”), straddles the border between adult play and a game.
The paper combines data from two studies, conducted separately by the authors in Finland and USA over the period of about a decade. The studies had different ethical considerations and methodological decisions. The approach is generally described as radical-ethnographic, considered necessary because people are notoriously poor at giving honest information about their sex lives, and relying solely on interview data would be unreliable.
After summarizing the details of Harviainen’s and Frank’s respective approaches, the paper moves on to describe what it is that they are actually researching. In both USA and Finland, the community and lifestyle around GSEs and swinging appears to have developed around the 1960s and 70s when free love was in vogue, though there is little in the way of proper historiography on the topic. The American community is obviously much larger, large enough to support commercial events. In America, the mainstream culture is much more conservative than in Finland, though sleeping around outside of one’s committed relationship is somewhat stigmatizing in both countries. It’s also noted that rules carry a greater weight in the smaller community of Finland, as news travel more efficiently than in America.
GSEs are usually organized at resorts, hotels, or cruise ships. In the American community, it is sometimes possible to take over an entire hotel, but in Finland, again, the smaller size of the community imposes its limits. There are a variety of possible ways the guests are picked, such as invitations through informal networks or open event sign-up. Generally, single women are allowed to attend, but men must bring a partner. Limiting single men is believed to reduce male aggression and generally to lead to an ideal mix. There are special events for women seeking the company of multiple single men.
There is a great deal of negotiation involved in and around a GSE. It is very important that everybody involved is on the same page so that the event may feel safe and pleasurable to all involved. This negotiation is divided into “hard” and “soft” negotiation. The “hard” negotiation is about things like scheduling and the basic rules of the event, as well as who can attend. Requirement that condoms be used, theme for the party, allowed sexual acts, such things. This manages expectations and streamlines negotiation during the event. “Soft” negotiation, then, is during the event and about specific interactions, often conducted implicitly, which leaves room for misunderstanding. While most interactions go smoothly, especially as members of the community learn to navigate these negotiations even in new communities – forming what is termed procedural literacy – there is always the potential for miscommunication.
In addition to procedural literacy, there are other things that make up the “ideal orgiast”. Physical attractiveness is obvious, as are sexual stamina and skill. Additionally, there is the ability to quickly and effectively communicate interest while maintaining a degree of emotional distance and not arousing jealousy. A good team presents as a couple with a strong emotional bond, and the other participants may feel safe their extradyadic escapades do not pose threats to their own or others’ relationships.
There is a magic circle around a GSE, an environment where the rules of the quotidian social reality are changed or relaxed. The magic circle is described as porous, and the participants remain aware of the social, psychological, and physical repercussions their actions would have outside of the magic circle.
As an aside on the magic circle, it is noted that while female-on-female intercourse happens both sides of the pond, playful male-on-male intercourse is much more common in Finnish events than in USA, where there may even be a hard limit on it. At Finnish events, it is described as “bi-playful” rather than “bi-curious”, quoting and interviewee: ‘‘I suck cock here because it’s a good show if I do so, not because I have any significant interest in man-on-man sex.’’
The authors argue that though GSEs have many gamelike attributes such as their hard rules and negotiation, the core nature of the activity remains playful. The rules are not so much impositions as a starting condition that makes the transgressive behaviours safe to undertake.
Original article: Group Sex as Play: Rules and transgression in shared non-monogamy, by J. Tuomas Harviainen and Katherine Frank, originally published August 11, 2016 in Games and Culture. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1555412016659835
Header image: detail from “Still Life with Dressed Game, Meat, and Fruit” by Alexandre-François Desportes, 1734, National Gallery of Art.
You might also like
More from Game Research Highlights
“Historically and Geographically Incorrect” – Colonialism and Board Games
Board games with colonialist themes as the focus of online discussions
Play, confront, and reconstruct: a guidebook to game analysis
A fresh guidebook research to help you prepare for a game analysis.
Spender’s Game – Problematic monetisation as seen by players
You thought loot boxes were bad? Well, gamers just reported another 35 forms of malicious microtransactions present in popular games.
