Aug 13 slinky commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Swinging Double Standards.
@9, there was a study a couple of years ago that said, yes, women DO like casual sex....but they're picky about who with, because the physical and social risks that women disproportinately bear from sex (pregnancy being the big one, followed by disease, sexual assault/rape, slut shaming, and being treated like a living masturbation sleeve) are high. They were willing to have casual sex, but only with a person they felt safe with and who they thought would pay attention to their pleasure.

When, "will this person kill or violently assault me" is a real everyday threat in your dating and sexual life, and you know that if he does try to kill or violently assault you that you will have your entire life picked apart in vivid detail, your past sexual experience questions, and flat out called a liar, you learn to be choosy of who you want to get naked with.

When, "Will I find myself with an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy as a result of having sex with this person" is an everyday reality for you, which no matter what the outcome will end with a bloody mess, you learn to be picky about who you fuck and when.
More...
Aug 10 slinky commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Worst Breakup Story Ever.
Adoption is an alternative to parenting, not to pregnancy.

Dan's kid was placed for adoption by somebody in an unstable life situation....NOT (as far as we know) by somebody who wanted and planned the pregnancy and then had the rug ripped out from under her by an asshole. (Also, LW1, I concur that he met somebody else, is dumping you for that somebody else, and dollars to donuts he comes crawling back six months from now after the new and shiny has worn off. Block all contact and make it so he can't find you, because nobody has time for that 7th grade BS.)

He's already told her he won't have anything further to do with the pregnancy. Highly likely he will resent her having a baby and all of the legal, financial, and social stuff that goes along with it, and make her and the kid's life hell for it.

If he DID meet someone else, which I suspect is what happened, probably he's not telling her that "Oh, by the way, I dumped my pregnant fiancee so I could be with you." The truth comes out, the new someone ditches him (because, again, who has time for that 7th grade BS), and now not only is the guy angry that he has to go through the legal nonsense of child placement, he's furious that the new Love Of His Life up and left because she doesn't have time for 7th grade BS. And he takes it out on LW and on the kid.

Not everything in life will have a storybook ending. The most likely "happy ending," if you can call it that, is this woman has an abortion, mourns what she had and lost, gets some therapy, and moves on. If she chooses to give birth and parent, she needs to start rallying her support network right now, everything from lawyers to people who can help with finances to work support to health care (horrible thought: if she's on HIS insurance and he yanks it while she's pregnant?) to family and friends, and get them helping her.

On paper, an abortion solves all of the legal, financial, health, economic, and employment problems. It isn't an "easy out," nor is it a sign that she's letting him win or any of that. Just....life threw LW a curve ball, and as sad as it might be, an abortion will solve all of the shit that her 7th grade asshole ex put her through.
More...
Aug 5 slinky commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Punting.
And then there's this:

"I told him that the kindest thing he could do if he didn't think he could practice monogamy, or an honest open relationship with rules, would be to tell me now so that I can leave. He said he can because he wants to be with me so badly."

RUN, LW, RUN.

This is how he hangs his success or failure on your head, rather than his actions. He cheats/breaks the rules again? Well, he didn't want to be with you that badly. He won't be honest with you? Well, it's your fault.

Being in a relationship with somebody doesn't make you stupid. Staying with somebody out of denial or sunk-costs doesn't make you stupid, either, but only one choice will cut the pain right now.
Aug 5 slinky commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Punting.
Fichu @9 nails it.

The "and he quit drinking" comes up more than once. Then he got stupid drunk with a rando off Tindr (which is NOT rando's fault, not in the slightest) and acted like an asshole while drunk.
Jul 2 slinky commented on Savage Love.
"We know Lezie is getting hit on in awkward or creepy ways. What makes them creepy for her? Is he too unattractive? Too poor? "

My sister used to have a dog named Ghengis. Ghengis was part lab, part afghan hound, and part great dane. He weighed a buck ten and stood up to my hip and I'm a woman of the valkyrie persuasion. He was the size of a dane with the coat and webbed feet and love of swimming of a black lab and the face and mane of the hound. And all Ghengis wanted to do on most days was sit on your lap and cuddle, except when creepy dudes were behaving inappropriately towards my sister.

On one occasion, a man across the street started making those moves towards my sister that all of us women have run into at some point, of a man moving towards us because he's going to creep on us. Ghengis saw it. He went rigid, stared at the dude, and his mane stood straight up. Didn't growl, didn't bark, didn't do so much as curl his lip, and yet Creepy Dude got the message loud and clear that Ghengis OBSERVED HIS BODY LANGUAGE and did not like what he was seeing.

The dude found somewhere else to be.

I'm not going to be so flip as to say 100% it's not what you look like. That's not true: we all have our preconceived notions, and, more importantly, we all have our experiences that say people who look like this one person who creeped on me before are more of a threat level than the background radiation. None of which changes the following point, put in caps because despite all the people saying this in different ways you still don't seem to get it:

IT'S NOT WHO YOU ARE. IT IS WHAT YOU DO. WHEN A PERSON IS BEHAVING IN A WAY THAT IS UNWANTED, THREATENING, AND MAKES THE TARGET OF THAT BEHAVIOUR FEEL HARASSED, THEIR ACTIONS ARE WHAT MAKES THEM CREEPY.

Not how hot they are, or they are not. Not whether they are a generic man or not. Not whether they are upstanding pillars of the community (Bill Cosby what?) or whether they are dressed in a way that makes you think "homeless and mentally ill."

It is the communication we get from those men that makes us flag them as creep. If the words out of your mouth are saying, no, no, I'm a good person! and yet you keep encroaching on our space, you trap us against the wall or the seat in public transit, you start touching me at work, you begin to follow me, or you buy me another goddamn coffee and act surprised when I see through the thinly veiled attempt to hit on me and then get angry when I shut you down, that's all about your actions and your communications. Not whether you're hot.

And because it bears repeating, not taking no for an answer is hella creepy. It doesn't matter if it's a soft no or a hard no or a fuck off. If a man does not respect me when I say no, he becomes a threat. Men who ignore a woman when she says no in a non-sexual situation are much likelier than background radiation to ignore a woman when she says no in a sexual situation.
More...
Jun 8 slinky commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Lesbian Crush.
@ 10, 12, 14 and 27...

We've talked about that, too, in actual words and not just guessing at what the other one felt. It was also awkward, but necessary. There are hard limits that we both adhere to, and there are certain lines that Shall Not Be Crossed because, as you said, it's not ok to be knowingly cruel to a friend.

The key thing is, we used our words. Not just "let's be friends," but, "is this okay? Are you okay?" And if so, take no and yes as valid answers.

Jun 7 slinky commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Lesbian Crush.
Straight woman with a lesbian friend/former coworker who I value highly here.

Lesbian friend had a HUGE crush on me when we first met. Except for the fact that I'm straight, I'm everything she asked for in a lady all rolled up in one. I know all of this because she told me, in one of the most hilariously awkward conversations I've ever had. And it was SUCH A MASSIVE RELIEF to hear her say, yeah, I'm crushing hard on you, because then it really was happening and I wasn't just dreaming it or picking up on weird vibes. Making it even more awkward, she was a coworker at the time of this conversation.

What did we do about it after that? Pretty much everything we would normally do otherwise. When we go out to lunch and I have a salad and she eats a meatball sub, and doesn't notice all the people in the restaurant who assume we're out on a date, I tease her about it (and yes, she's the butch and I'm the fairy-princess femme, like every stereotype out of But I'm A Cheerleader you've ever seen). We go to movies. I get her way day-drunk on Italian soda and prosecco. She tolerates me spamming her with pictures of my cat.

Long story short, if this woman is your friend, and you value her friendship and she values yours, you can both survive an awkward crush. Your relationship with your current girlfriend can also survive an awkward crush. If you're at a point where you can talk about it, you can, or....you can gloriously do nothing whatsoever and wait for the crush to fade. You don't have to act on any of your feelings, you don't have to deal with multi-person awkward instead of single-person awkward if you don't want to. It's up to you.

My friend and I kiss each other on the lips when we say goodbye, like family. I'm going to try to get her and her mom to come visit me for Pride weekend. We wouldn't have it any other way.
More...
Jun 7 slinky commented on Hillary Clinton Has Already Won the Democratic Nomination.
"PP does not usually make endorsements when both candidates are pro-choice, but did in this race because the teally are part of the Democratic Establishment"

@74, in PP's own words:

"When you see their records side by side, there’s no question why the Planned Parenthood Action Fund endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. She has simply demonstrated the strongest record, clearest leadership, and most focused commitment to women’s health of any presidential candidate.

For anyone who supports Senator Sanders, know we are grateful for his strong record on reproductive rights. This endorsement doesn’t mean we’ll do anything negative about Sanders’ campaign. Instead it means that for the first time in history, we have the chance to help elect someone who’s been fighting to expand reproductive health and rights for decades to the White House, just when we need that kind of champion the most.

- See more at: https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/…"

It's the difference between an ally and a champion. Sanders has been an ally to women's equality issues and a champion for income equality issues. But, without giving an honest thought or discussion on how inequal treatment due to gender/biological sex (including LGBT issues as well as cis-women issues) and due to race/ethnicity--meaning, US society values the work that white men do more because it values white men more, and that cannot be mitigated with simple "rising tide lifts all boats" argument--he's going to have to deal with the judgment of people who will see a better option and choose that better option. A champion, instead of an ally.

So, if PP choses the champion who has been publicly level grinding for years and making it a priority, as opposed to somebody who has always been on their side but not level grinding, is that a bad thing? Again, Sanders could have done these things. He didn't. His opponent (for all her flaws) did.

And for that matter, if an organization that busts its chops to make sure a systematically underserved population gets critical health care and education despite the level of harassment and legal obstructionism and death threats and firebombings is a member of The Establishment....does that mean that the establishment is 100% bad?
More...
Jun 6 slinky commented on Hillary Clinton Has Already Won the Democratic Nomination.
This:

"I'm pretty sure it was pre-ordained in some back room that HRC would get the nomination. I'm sure she'll be nominated even if she's indicted. " (@10)

And This:

"If Bernie doesn't want to run in 4 years, his supporters better find someone as much like him NOW to prop up." (@30)

Those are two sides of the same coin, being, Bernie Sanders doesn't level grind. He may have been a senator for 30 years, but he carefully avoided doing any of the hard work of building and supporting a movement until this year. It's all well and good to have your +5 Sword of Divine Justice and +8 Armour of Truth and Light, but if you're a Level 4 cleric up against a Level 15 Red Dragon, you're going to have a hard time, especially when the person on the other team is (for all her faults) a hard-core policy wonk who has been working on building a coalition and a platform for years. Compare HRC and Obama in 2008....the Obama campaign's level grinding and campaign planning was nothing short of breathtaking, and he did his level grinding to match her in wonkiness. Sanders isn't doing that, and it shows.

Also, about the building a team part of level grinding....Sanders until recently didn't pay attention to the down-ballot races and the class-based argument he has been making is so rigidly focused on social class that it ignores how race, gender, sex, and social class all get mishmashed together. Talking down Planned Parenthood because PP went with the person whose voting and SecState records jived with their goals? Seriously? The whole business about primaries in the deep south don't count as much as elsewhere, and the subsequent pissing-off of black and hispanic voters who correctly smelled what the Sanders campaign was stepping in? Seriously?? These are the groups that he could have reached, goals he could have worked towards, if he had specifically tried. He didn't.

It's not Clinton's fault if her opponent isn't willing to get down in the trenches and do the hard dirty work of campaigning.
More...
May 11 slinky commented on Savage Love.
To be honest, between the "infrequent and dull and feels like an obligation" and "it was my decision," LW1 sounds like he took an already not ideal situation and threw any possibility of improvement out the window. Either he gets his time-consuming kinky sex the way he wants it (and never mind that it's time she could be sleeping), or he doesn't want to have sex at all?

Yep. He made himself one more chore on her list, along with dealing with the laundry and disciplining the children. This despite her attempting to be GGG despite having the burden of family care.