Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Movie Mix

"Screwing Their Brains Out": Plato's Retreat and the Rise of Swinging

By Cynthia Fuchs, PopMatters. Posted April 16, 2009.


A new film about Plato's Retreat shows how the swinger's club helped challenge gender stereotypes and regressive ideas about sex.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"Ten years earlier, everyone was rolling around naked at Woodstock, you know, and smoking pot and screwing their brains out in the meadows. This was just an indoor version that was accessible to New Yorkers." Introducing the basic concept behind Plato’s Retreat, the artist and model Matuschka is smiling. A club for "swingers" that opened on Manhattan’s Upper West Side in 1977, Plato’s was part of the same disco-fevery, anything-goes milieu that produced Studio 54. Certainly, the sex was exciting, as well as controversial. But the club also represented an effort to think through the mores behind monogamy, to challenge assumptions and imagine an alternative.

Inspired by gay clubs, Plato’s was conceived by first owner Larry Levenson as a site for heterosexual couples to meet and swap partners. According to American Swing, Jon Hart and Mathew Kaufman’s entertaining documentary, Levenson was an ambitious, not especially careful entrepreneur, imagining that he could call his business a "nonprofit" to avoid paying taxes, and that he could separate "sex" and "love" to claim a commitment to his girlfriend and business partner Mary.  Though he was unable to sustain these ideals (AIDS intervened, along with the IRS), both Larry and Mary promoted their "lifestyle" vigorously, appearing on Donahue and David Susskind to defend their choices. "No one is monogamous," declares Levenson. When Phil suggested the practice of swinging ran contrary to "common sense," Larry argued otherwise -- marriage was backwards and unsophisticated, a remnant of old property laws and limited thinking.

For the most part, the film is less interested in Levenson’s theorizing about sex and free thinking than it is in the club’s sensational aspects, as well as Levenson’s increasingly messy self-aggrandizing. Photos and footage show multiple bodies engaged in various sex acts (Juggs editor Dian Hanson says, "There were maybe 200 bodies in there on a busy night, and just writhing together like a bucket of worms"), and several interviewees remember their "first times." Mike says, "Everybody was so nice to me, everybody made you feel at home," and Miles, a model, says he was impressed by a redheaded girl’s enthusiasm: "She was a maniac," he recalls, and kept saying, "Oh! Pussy loves cock!"; in turn, he thought, "This is my kind of place."

If such anecdotes indicate the likelihood that Plato’s helped some men to fulfill fairly traditional fantasies, the club made sense for many women as well. Sex therapist Bryce Britton notes that the swinging at Plato’s challenged some gender stereotypes, saying, "Women were really in a position to be assertive to approach men for sex, to try out a lot of things that we had been on the receiving end of." And a club-goer remembers, "I was this normal housewife person. My husband left, his girlfriend was having a baby." She decided to give Plato’s a try, she says, and once inside, she was sold. "You don’t believe what you saw, it was like a page in a magazine and you were sitting in it. And then you make up your mind, you’re into it or you’re not. And I was into it."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: sex, monogamy, polygamy, swinging, orgy

Cynthia Fuchs is Popmatters' film and TV editor.


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Swinging and Individual Freedom is Back
Posted by: terradea42 on Apr 18, 2009 5:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Plato's retreat might have been a nice step toward sexual freedom, but fame and drugs and money hampered the progress. Sexual freedom is a powerful mind-freeing tool. Through sexual exploration, we can throw off government and religious oppression. For that reason alone, governments and religious leaders try very hard to keep sexual freedom away from the masses.

Swinging is back, along with the fight for human rights. Non-monogamous couples are finding that the rules and traditions of yesterday were only put in place to control social behavior, and they are now learning to free themselves. It's not for everyone, but for those who are ready, living a non-monogamous lifestyle is like getting out of jail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Swinging Relationships
Posted by: fcs25 on Apr 18, 2009 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Swinging is only for couples that are secure in their relationships and totally honest with each other.Any other type of relationship that enters the swinging lifestyle will fail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm Non-Monogamous, But I'm Not a Swinger
Posted by: Libertine on Apr 18, 2009 10:41 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most swingers are emotionally monogamous, if not physically so. And they approach extramarital sex as an organized couples' activity.

Being neither physically nor emotionally monogamous, but rather a completely free agent when it comes to sex and/or love, makes swinging a bad fit for me. I prefer to acquire new partners independently, not as part of a couple.

Similarly, polyamory isn't a good fit, either, because I don't love every person I have sex with, nor do I expect to, as the two are not inextricably bound in my mind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"... the end of sex in the 80s..."
Posted by: wwittman on Apr 19, 2009 10:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sex ended in the 80s?

I missed the memo.

Damn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Talk about...
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Apr 20, 2009 3:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'Those were the days!' Did we have fun, though..! I'm glad I had my chance at it.
I really really enjoyed myself. And oh--the food was TERRIFIC! When we bothered to stop for a snack, which I admit wasn't often!

Here's the great thing--we were pioneers back then. There was one rule--NO 'have to'. There were couples who'd watch the action without joining in--only to come back the following week and partake enthusiastically.

The linchpin--the one word that everyone listened to and took seriously--was: "No,thank you," or, "Not now..." In that,nobody forced anyone, and nobody felt they HAD to have sex with anybody if they didn't care to. It wasn't said often, but when it was, it was absolutely respected, with a smile and a shrug.


This of course was the heart of the gestalt at Platos--and indeed everywhere else in the swinging scene: aka actual real sexual freedom.

Though we were pioneers back then, now there's Plato's--which I understand has re-opened! Is it a coincidence, or did the vile repression of the past 30 intervening years, get swept away by the political changes that we all knew were on their way?

Though I no longer swing, (I live in Grand Prairie TX now, LOL!) I'm real happy to have had the experience. The 60s were all about "Sexual Freedom"--remember the song? Well--in the 70s, it all came true. I'm so sorry to hear about Levenson--many of us consider him to have been a great man. Too bad the IRS didn't agree--they doubtless, were looking at the tsunami that would have unfolded, had Levenson been successful in blocking the tax-man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i suppose that there's a certain amount of achievement in being able to act like a frog
Posted by: Suzon on Apr 20, 2009 3:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not something that everyone feels a need for, however. I'm not saying this as a put-down. A lot of people get seriously over-parented and/or over-churched.

I think it was Eric Berne who said that the adult self was there to free their child self to play safely. Different people will interpret that differently. For me, it's monogamy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AND BTW, HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE "FUCHS"
Posted by: wellaware lec on Apr 20, 2009 4:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AS IN THE AUTHOR'S NAME????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fooks as in spooks Posted by: RR#1
AIDS and mental illness - if only people weren't such bigots...
Posted by: Jasonix on Apr 20, 2009 5:05 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...we could do whatever we want with our bodies and nothing would ever come back to haunt us, ever.

Why, all the people mentioned in the article who got AIDS and had mental breakdowns were just the victims of evangelical prejudice and moralizing. If it weren't for the repressive, patriarchal, male-dominated religious inhibitions of our sexist capitalist society, there wouldn't be an nasty microbes.

But this time we'll get it right. This time we'll find a way to beat the microbes, and if we only break free of the lingering tidbits of religious morality, our neurons won't misfire with pesky emotions like jealousy. It'll all work this time, I promise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Did their brains fall out through the screw-holes?
Posted by: hagwind on Apr 20, 2009 6:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Swinging isn't necessarily progressive, regressive -- or new. My father was born in 1922. When he was a kid in a very small town west of Boston, his upstanding WASP parents swapped partners; it was common in their social circle. I didn't learn about this till after my grandmother died, and my grandfather died before I was born, so all I know about it is from a kid's perspective: my dad remembered being confused by one or the other parent's occasionally coming home at night with someone else.

Sex is only necessary for procreation. If you don't want to procreate, it's optional. Having sex doesn't make you crazy. Not having sex doesn't make you crazy. If you go crazy, there are probably other factors involved. Physical pleasure has other sources besides sex. Pass the word.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Alternet is so god damn liberal...
Posted by: sumwoman on Apr 20, 2009 7:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
why don't ya'll display a photo of a large, half clad erect penis for a change!

pussy liberals!
Why don't you give women what they really want?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Do you really want one? Posted by: Jasonix
The opening sentence is pure BS.
Posted by: adempatriot on Apr 20, 2009 7:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Ten years earlier, everyone was rolling around naked at Woodstock, you know, and smoking pot and screwing their brains out in the meadows."
What an senasationalistic and irresponsible way to open an article about something very, very different from Woodstock: Plato's Retreat.
Unlike the author, I was AT the Woodstock festival- for four days- and did not see one naked person or one couple having sex, anywhere. There is no way "everyone" was "screwing their brains out in the meadows". Some of them, sure; but remember, there were hundreds of thousands of people there.
But the press, then and now, created that myth, because sex sells, even if it is a lie or an exaggeration.
Believe it or not, folks, Woodstock 1969 was about music, not sex.
After reading the first sentence of this article, I can't take the rest of it seriously.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Live and Let Live
Posted by: Gravitas on Apr 20, 2009 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not my personal thing but I don't see why we have to be so obsessed with the lives of others. What people do with their bodies is their business.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I know people who were always careful
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Apr 20, 2009 10:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who wound up with incurable nasty diseases.

All I am saying is be careful. I understand that there are an unbelievable (thanks to horny world travelers) at least 50 STDs out there. Goody.

I lucked out incredibly and haven't had sex with but one (happily disease free) person since 1982 - but I'd be the last to make a moral judgment on folks not as lucky as myself. I was enthusiastically promiscuous (between relationships) until that point and was very careful - but really lucky as well. Don't regret a second of it.

Fortunately I have slowed down enough now that I can be happy in a monogamous relationship.

Were I still sexually active (outside my marriage) however, I would be much more cautious than I was pre-1983.

Just sayin...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Monogamy
Posted by: wormfarmer on Apr 20, 2009 4:54 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is not an "assault on individual freedoms", as I have read in at least one post to this story. I guess I'm defending the preference and practice of the "boring' existence with one partner. I like my partner to prefer me, for their own reasons. I'm not defending marriage, but monogamy, yes.
As time has shown, free love results in a multitude of consequences, and there is no experience like commitment to Loving a partner and joining lives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pamela from Australia
Posted by: pvalemont@bigpond.com on Apr 20, 2009 8:21 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obviously you (predominantly) young Americans have not learned a single thing from the mistakes of your forebears. I was sickened to the core to read this article. It is possibly the most disgusting and frightening article I have read in years. In fact, if it were true, I am sure your society could not survive and would quickly disintegrate, as so many corrupt societies have ( fallen) in history. As a woman who lived through the 60's, and raised three sons alone, I can tell you sexual promiscuity brought only disillusionment, pain and suffering to two generations of adults and children. There is nothing liberating about it, as we of our generation quickly discovered. (A rude awakening, a cruel enlightenment, soon follows.) Rather it was soul and relationship destroying and destructive emotionally as well as physically. If you are assuming that group sex was the norm in the 60's, well, I never heard of it, either here in Australia or overseas. Perhaps I was protected from it. But I have heard of it in recent years, as being part of this new wave of so called morality, ( amorality?) which seems worse than anything that was around in the 60's. Your article reads as though America has become something of a cesspit of morality which I simply do not believe, and you should beware of spreading that image, remember this site is international. You have a duty to your countrymen and women to keep things in the correct light, the proper perspective. There may be a small number of people without sexual morals in the U.S.A., who care nothing for the physical and emotional fallout such a lifestyle brings, but surely that is not the standard? Just the mass breakdown of marriage alone over the last two decades( of which I and my children became statistics) was enough to cause major heartbreak and pain across some countries for millions. Readers, please don't fall for this dangerous claptrap. I urge you, from bitter experience, to make sound, healthy and loving monogamous relationships, and build a healthy lifestyle, as much as you are able. If you don't, the end result will destroy not only you as individuals, but collectively, your country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Invited many times, did not go to Plato's retreat:here's why
Posted by: NYCartist on Apr 21, 2009 3:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Women could get in free and then could separate from the person with whom she entered. I was invited many times. Some of the reasons that I didn't go: the pool has lots of "you know what" floating in it. I was just single again, in my mid30s and met several men who had been to Plato's Retreat, who I'd met at a singles regular group event at a nearby church. I actually met my now-husband there in 1979 (at the church). We are not Christians.

I am monogamous and always have been. I looked on the internet for old video of Plato's Retreat but didn't find it.

I think women (and possibly men) were sex objects at Plato's Retreat. At that time, there were people doing a lot of what someone called "sport sex" (his wife, from whom he was separated). AIDS ended it all.

It was a time of women exploring in all kinds of ways. Plato's R was like a bar-gone-wild...(no liquor, I don't think).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement