Uh! Again, these greatest-hits letters make me desperately want an update from the writer. I'm with Dan; I remember needing to excuse myself for a bit after reading this the first time too!

Could you also ask her to send along pictures too?

That was indeed a hot letter, one I wish Dan had some follow up for.

One of the all time greats, this one!

It's been three & a half years. Well past time for that follow-up report.

"... he doesn't turn me on."

In other words it ain't gonna work. She thinks she loves him because of other things he gives her like emotional and financial support that she can't get from the bad-boy ex. For the sake of everyone involved, end it now.

If you ask me, the boyfriend needs to step up and address her selfishness directly, first by throwing her around a bit, then tearing off her pretty little panties, spanking her bare ass red, and then having her tell him she's sorry for being so greedy while his cock is stuffed in her mouth. Then, after he grows tired of hearing her cock-muffled apologies, he should turn her over, lift her ass up, and fuck the selfishness right out of her.

If that doesn't work, and it probably won't, the boyfriend should invite the ex over himself and see if the two of them can't fuck some sense into her.

I'm wondering how things went three years and change after the fact. If GGG boyfriend is so timid and insecure, then having a threesome with a more confident guy could have gone either way. So did they crash and burn, fizzle out or flame up strong? The real measure of good advice is results.

What on earth was so hot about the idea of the threesome? There could be some potential with the setup, and it's probably the best this LW can do, but I cannot for the life of me imagine any threesome with this LW being in any way hot, although I do suspect that my opinion might be different had the letter been written by the Ken Doll.

"Privacy is his kink," seems unworthy, almost nasty of spirit.

I've always been surprised at how quickly the New Boyfriend agreed to invite the Ex Boyfriend back into the bedroom. I don't imagine there are very many 25-year-old guys eager to see their hot new girlfriend banging the ex she clearly still has a torch for. There's more to that story. I'm also skeptical that the Ex is going to nobly provide his former fucktoy with a firm seeing-to and then depart via the nearest door with a jaunty "my work here is done". I'll bet he brought an agenda along with all his whips and chains.

Yeah, this is one letter that would definitely have benefited from a follow-up. If anything happened, it was either hot as hell or a holy trainwreck, and very possibly both.

10 "Privacy is his kink" seems perfectly plausible. Dan is the most sexualized homo in existence. Keeping what happens at home private is very sexy in its own way. Lots of the best sex stuff is about control, after all.

Also, I second the notion of sex getting better over time. If it not for love, I wouldn't have stuck it out long enough to get it right.

Isn't it Monday?

I know 10 people already said so but - fuckit: we want that full report!

Seems like an untapped market. Couples who require a little abuse in their relationship. Could she be satisfied with using an online service where a guy using a webcam comes on the monitor and shouts insults while they make love? JQuery is very powerful...

"So anyway, that's how a real man fucks his woman. But don't let it bother you bro, you can have her back now. Just let me get cleaned up."

Ya, I can see that going over really well.

My own advice, if anyone reading is in a similar situation, is to end the relationship with the guy who doesn't turn you on. He's never going to turn you on, and in five or ten years you'd both be way bitter. Don't go back to that crazy ex, though. You left him for a reason. Let your freak flag fly when you start dating, and look for the middle ground: someone calm and confident and who smells good to you. Tell him what turns you on, and ask him what turns him on. Then be flexible over time as those turn-ons evolve.

@16 If you've built too much of your relationship on sex, yes, maybe.

If sex is just one small facet of your incredible relationship...it can end quite well.

Um, yeah... I'd wanna make it last too! Timid my ars... that's a risk taking self-molding 'man man' in my opinion. HOT!!! So the idea that strikes me is "Am I the only one turned on -by her man- that her man is that willing to try such ways to satisfy her?" Hmmmm... Well- Glad I was craving some savage pep talkin', now a lady can get her beauty sleep.

Loving the neuroses on display from some of the people in this comments section... Is it really that hard to believe that her new boyfriend could be on board with the scenario and would find it hot to see her with her ex? That she really cares for her new boyfriend and wants to give their sex life a jumpstart, not fuck her ex one more time for the sake of it?* I'm a straight woman and if my boyfriend came to me with the idea of a threesome with his ex in which she "shows me how it's done" I would be amused and excited. Some of y'all really need to have more faith in your own sexual attractiveness and worthiness. Women don't just stay with men because the men do a good job of keeping us away from other men. We stay with them because we like them!

*Hint: if that was all she cared about, she'd just dump her boyfriend and call her ex.

EricaP @17: Why is the ex "crazy"? He did her in a way that she couldn't get enough of. Isn't "she should get the rough sex that she wants but any man who gives it to her is a mentally disturbed brute" the sort of thing we'd hear from some Gender Studies 101 class? If she's not "crazy" for wanting a given kind of sex then surely a man can't be crazy for giving it to her.

And, yeah, @20, there are neuroses out there, but I think the reactions aren't unsound. If, after 3 months her overwhelming thought is to get totally fucked by an ex in front of her current then ... unless she's a dominant and he's a cuckold fetishist ... it carries with it so many different kinds of fucked up that it isn't neurotic to point it out. If he's fine with it, fine. If he's "fine with it" because he wants to keep her, no.

Count me in on wanting to know how this turned out. NSA, if you're out there, let us all know.

@20. Oh, and another thing about neuroses. I can't speak for other straight men out there, but I'd feel very safe wagering large amounts that the vast, vast, vast majority of us would not see "you're not sexually doing it for me, so sit there like a good boy while I fuck my ex in front of you so he can show you how it's done" is not a message that we would interpret as "I like you".

Ms Granny - Plausible, yes. It's just nastily expressed.

@23. Nothing nasty about it. It's a witty comment on one man's deeply felt commitment to his privacy. Have we got to the post-Oprah stage now where not only is privacy considered passe, but noting that somebody likes to keep things private is seen as insulting to that person?

As for the general situation, I'm going to agree with Ms Erica from a different direction. Some things people know they like, some things people discover they like, and some things people are converted into liking. It seems a kindness, when a taste is potentially problematic, to lower the threshold on how much of a try to give it. When someone GGG gives a problematic activity a fair trial and displays no natural aptitude, it's probably time to part amicably, a far better course than getting that person into that activity and then ending the relationship later, thus leaving the GGG party rather worse off than before.

Oh, and one other thing that NSA didn't factor in. He has only known her a few months, and is (or should be) cautious about "abusing" a woman he doesn't know that well no matter how much she asks. There's lots of places that you can whisper "too soon, trusted her too soon", but inside a holding cell at the local precinct is probably one of the worst. I'm not saying she'd turn on him like that, but I'm saying that if she did the cops would charge and he'd have to be a fool to not consider the possibility. (And I'd note that a girl that wants to run back and be fucked by an ex-bf only a few months into her new relationship with a man she supposedly loves probably isn't sending out "I'm stable and reliable!" signals of any discernable worth.)

Oh, and there is one other thing to consider: social conditioning. If you were raised by an old-school family (in the positive sense of the word) then the notion of hitting a woman was considered loathsome. If you were raised in a feminist environment, the mantra of "never hit a woman" would have been bred in the bone, too. It's a bit much to expect some guy who has spent his whole life learning "never hit her! ever!" to switch almost right away to "smack her around, she loves it!" I mean, be bloody reasonable to the poor sap.

Mr Seeker - I'm all in favour of privacy. If anything, the "his kink" phrasing suggests the idea that privacy is passe. There's just enough of a sneer in the phrase to push it over the line.

I agree that there was some wit in it, but wit can be nasty. A topical case in point would be how Mrs Crawley accepted Mrs Bird's resignation on Downton Abbey. Upset that Mrs Crawley proposed to hire a former prostitute, Mrs Bird tendered her resignation, saying that she would go to her sister, who'd told her she could easily find an opening for a plain cook, drawing the reply, "They will certainly find that in you." Mrs Bird then expressed her fear that, if she did stay on and work with Ethel, people might think she herself had followed that profession. "No one would look at you and think that, Mrs Bird."

That actually struck me as almost lifted from Agatha Christie's The Secret Adversary. When Tommy and Tuppence met up after WWI and formed Young Adventurers, Ltd., Tuppence revealed her determination to marry a millionaire if she could find one, claiming that she had never been sentimental. Tommy readily agreed that, "Nobody would ever think of sentiment in connection with you."

Oh, one thing I forgot, and this is a big one - major points all around. Has anyone noticed the significant omission from the response and comments?

Nobody used the D word. This is almost encouraging, but I am never encouraged this early in the month.

@29:
dactyliomancy?

Rhymes with Lump.

Recall that, very recently, I think it was a Podcast call from a woman in a similar situation, and the D word was applied equally to both Can't Meet Your Needs and Won't Meet Your Needs. I dislike D culture and am almost encouraged that in such a similar case neither Mr Savage nor any of the comments have applied the D word.

I really think this is the best option. The worst that could happen is that they break up because of it, but they are already on course to do so. The bf could also realize this and it might be part of the reason why he's so willing to have the threesome. Furthermore, besides domination tutorial that he might receive, he might actual just like the idea of the threesome. Who knows, it could be a fantasy of his to tag team a girl. In that case its a win-win-win. She gets the rough sex she wants, he gets lessons in rough sex, and he gets to live out a fantasy.

I think there is a difference between "he doesn't turn me on" and "we're not having good sex." The sex part is fixable, the other--not so much.

Dan, it would make a great book to hear the follow-up stories to some of your letters. I'm sure it could help a lot of people and be interesting to the rest of us.

vennominon@29: I recommended dumping @17 (speaking to lurkers in similar situations). I think people don't usually get past "he doesn't turn me on" and end up having years of great sex together.

seeker@21: I didn't mean crazy as in he needs to be medicated or institutionalized. Clearly I don't think people who like rough sex are mentally disturbed, since I'm one of them. But why does one leave a guy with whom one has fantastic sex? In my case, he was crazy libertarian and at some point the hot sex wasn't worth it any more.

seeker@26/27: To me, the issue is not that he doesn't want to hit her. I agree that the social conditioning is strong but people can work through that together. But what's the point of working through it together if the baseline attraction isn't there? If she had written: "he turns me on so much but how do I get him to hit me for real," my answer would be different.

@33 ya beat me to it!

@seeker6079: If you were raised by an old-school family (in the positive sense of the word) the notion of hitting a woman was considered loathsome

Hitting a woman is frowned upon in new school families, too. :-)

I suppose some women really want to be slapped in the face and choked and such, and personally, it would take me some time (and lots of trust) to work myself up to that. But I get the impression LW would be satisfied with some creative alpha-caveman-male role playing along with some good old fashioned rough-housing and swats on the ass, which is a categorically different kind of "hitting".

I understand that lots of guys aren't up for even that, but at the same time, I don't understand it all. The idea of a woman who wants you to have your way with her, who wants to submit to you and give herself to you in that way - I don't know, it just seems like universal erection material to me.

@EricaP is right, this relationship won't be good for either of them in the long run. I can't imagine LW would have difficulty finding a good man who would enjoy indulging her kinks, and I know there are plenty of women out there for her boyfriend who prefer making sweet tender love in a candlelit room with smooth jazz playing in the background.

If this guy is genuinely into this, and it didn't completely hit the self-destruct button, he's a saint. My recent ex DOES have a cuckold thing and regularly enjoyed MMF threesomes and he would never ever ever let an previous ex be that guy. Even if it was hot in the moment (if? Holy Jesus my head would explode) it would kill him after. And he has absolutely no doubts that he satisfied me and then some. There are some things that cannot be undone, unheard, unfelt.

However, he doesn't turn me on. It has nothing to do with looks—he's GORGEOUS—but rather with the fact that I am submissive and like things rough (rape fantasies, being tied up, etc.). He is GGG and tries, but he is just too timid. ... I talked to my wonderful GGG boyfriend, and he agreed right away to have a threesome with my previous guy. ***(bolding for emphasis)

I'm relieved to see more than a couple of commentors above who have suggested the GGG bf may have a cuckold fetish. Personally, I don't think anything instructive would have come about from the threesome, simply because the bf is also submissive. And the LW chose him initially, not because she was attracted to him, but because he's (all caps) GORGEOUS!

She may have been swayed by the superficial and ignored the fact that they are sexually incompatible. Sure, some people can switch from dom to sub and back, but somehow I think the current bf sounds just too darn eager to please (like a puppy) to be convincing as a dom.

@39

He could have a cuckold fetish, or he just might be really into run of the mill group-sex.

Also, I've been wondering how well the LW is articulating what she wants her bf to do. If she's just saying dominate me and toss me around like a rag doll to someone who has never done that before, she's likely not going to get what she wants.

She needs to give more explicit directions, but perhaps isn't because it runs counter to her submissive role - telling him what to do makes her less submissive. And rather than temporally stepping out of her submissive role, her way of showing her bf what to do without giving up her submission satisfaction took the form of having a threesome with the ex.

Also, his timidness during sex could be a personality trait that he can't break out of, or it could just be a complete lack of confidence in executing her wishes.

Nice that the word "boyfriend" is now obsolete, and Dan can use the word "husband."

@41 If she's just saying dominate me and toss me around like a rag doll to someone who has never done that before, she's likely not going to get what she wants.

Well, not right away. "Noob" is not synonymous with "hopeless", but I do concede that it's difficult for a sub to teach without taking an ascendant role, and agree with @39 that he seems submissive and so probably won't take the dom role. He and the gf seem to be trying hard for each other, but one does question whether they're a match.

Ms Erica - Your exact phrasing was, "End the relationship," and nowhere in all of post 17 does the D word appear. That is progress. Nobody, even among those who think the relationship is doomed, has told her to dump him, even though the D word was thrown about all over the place in that Podcast call with the caller not getting the rough sex she wanted. It was Dump Won't and Dump Can't as if the two were absolutely equivalent in terms of what the partner in the case deserved.

On the other hand, if we are so far gone into Dump Culture that you think End the Relationship is absolutely equal to Dump, then maybe the war is already lost and Julius King has taken over the earth. (To save you time, he's the antihero of A Fairly Honourable Defeat.) I knew it was too early in the month for optimism.

@44, ah... hmm... When I see "dump" in Dan's columns (unless it is preceded by "take a") I translate it to "end the relationship." Dan's an entertainer, and he writes in a colorful manner. I'm still friends with all my ex's; I'm not even clear on what kind of brutal action you think "dumping" entails, as opposed to "breaking up" or "ending the relationship." (Are those two equivalent in your mind?)

Thanks, by the way, for the Murdoch assist...

Ms Erica - Dump implies Grievous Avoidable Fault. The majority of the time, the Dumpee (at least in the mind of the Dumper) deserves to be dumped. Dumps fit the DTMFA model, or, if they differ, are only done in a timely manner that negates the Already. One dumps Won't, but parts amicably from Can't.

There is a subset of dumps in which the fault lies with the Dumper. In such a case, Dumper may perceive it as a dump or may be trying to part amicably, but Dumpee is so aggrieved for cause that one might well hear the complaint TMFDM. (Classic example - the cancerous Mrs Gingrich dumped while lying in her hospital bed.)

It's tricky to explain, but largely a question of attitude. If you are still friends with all your exes, it seems unlikely that you would go around saying that you dumped any of them, as there's so much disrespect if not contempt in the phrase. Even if you didn't personally mean it so, you'd likely pick up on other people thinking less of your dumpees and ease out of using the D word where it would not give the most accurate impression. I pay you the compliment of assuming that you would not stick a big scarlet D on your friends.

As for breaking up/ending the relationship, I think there is a useful distinction that could be drawn, but it matters a lot less than the difference between either and the D word. A breakup ideally would imply either full ownership of the split or meeting a certain standard of acrimony. But I have no wish to spend any capital on this distinction.

A portion of the usefulness of the Dump distinction could well lie in that one might disagree with a self-proclaimed dumper that the situation called for a dump. (Semi-classic example - the woman who met the Magic the Gathering world champion on a dating site, saw him a couple of times, then wrote an indignant article along the line of, How Dare He consider himself suitable dating material when he plays a collectible card game, and expected universal congratulations over having "dumped" him.)

my mom, my best friend, my second serious girlfriend were all victims of rape, and my wife was molested by her brother. As you can imagine, this made me a bit overly protective of women, and very uncomfortable dominating my wife or partners, always afraid I was being the actual bad guy. As much as my wife encouraged me, I couldn't get into the head space to do it, until another partner was super explicit and explained that me being dominant was not about ME but about HER, and was really just a different way of pleasuring her, and that is was a way of giving, evem if it felt like taking. We also played with another couple where the husband dominated his wife, and was able to see, first hand, how it worked in the context of a loving relationship. since then, I, many of my lovers, and especially my wife, have been very grateful and happy that i figured it out, so there is hope. But unless this guy has a cuck fetish, the threesome seems like a bad idea, as the 'crazy' ex may know how to dominate her, i doubt the dynamic between them (which is not healthy enough to keep the relationship going) is going to teach the new boyfriend how to make it work for HIM. lastly, in the boyfriends shoes I would hate this on two levels: one, this guy is an ex, so there is an emotional minefield, and it not fair - they have practiced this dynamic and made it work for them, while he is figuring it out, and at a total disadvantage. if he is in love with the letter writer, this seems like a formula for learning the wrong lessons about dom/sub and his girlfriend, as hot as you spectators might think the scene is.

If it isn't a cuckold fetish, I wonder how well somebody that timid would deal with watching a stranger (to him) have rough sex with his girlfriend. If he won't hit her because he's too sensitive / anxious about hurting her, wouldn't watching someone else 'hurt' her be a bit stressful?

@46 Okay, thanks for explaining.

Mr Bliss - If it worked out well for you, great. But why do you think it's the same for everyone? You make it seem as if the BF has a PROBLEM he needs to GET OVER, when perhaps becoming the sort of person the LW wants might make him the kind of person his better self doesn't want to be.

The couple from whom I really would want a follow-up would be the LW whose BF insisted on humiliating him in the bedroom. That LW did write back in that he was well-treated otherwise, but I still have had the odd worry about him from time to time. I sometimes picture him dumped (a la Mrs G) and unable to form the new relationship his better self wants.