report this user
Feb 27 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Being A Couple & Sleeping in Separate Beds Is Cool, Too.
The sleep-talking and night terrors will require a different room, and a closed door between.

Sweats? Get waffle-weave cotton blankets, and a fan. You can control how much heat and moisture get wicked off by doubling up the blanket and pointing how directly the fan blows on you.

Pro-tip: squirrel-cage style blowers don't hum like regular fans, they just make white noise. (Which some people recommend to mask sounds to help sleep.. Why pay for a special white noise generator when you can get a fan that does the same thing and provides cooling?) They are also VERY directional, meaning you can aim one at half of a bed and not disturb the person on the other half if they don't like the moving air.

That, and what everybody else said about getting your cuddle time in while you are awake, and stop worrying about the sleeping arrangements. Quality time does not occur while you are unconscious. But sleeping better will make you happier and a better partner the next day.
Feb 14 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
@134 &136: I'm not objecting to the girl-on-girl sex, and never have. I'm objecting to the game-playing during the negotiating. I've said that several times already. Your continued insistence that it's about the girl-on-girl sex indicates either pathetic reading comprehension or a commitment to straw men.

@137: Nobody has consented to anything at this point; you are talking about purely theoretical sex partners that you are theoretically in the process of pursuing, and you are referring to them by isolated body parts that you theoretically have a right to go get.
Feb 14 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
@131 Lava Girl: "people fall in love outside the bedroom all the time, so no one can really make that promise ever."

I fully agree. So it's kind of doubly disingenuous of Girlfriend, as a bi person, to play that card. She's theoretically capable of falling in love with a considerably larger percentage of the population than he is. There is no guarantee that she isn't going to fall in love with her female fuck buddy, or that her limiting herself to other women isn't going to end just as badly for the relationship as him dating other women might.

"So can she offer something else in exchange, something not sexual? Like she makes him Sunday breakfast for a month and she only gets to be with another woman once. Then they talk. If she finds she is interested in being with women, then they renegotiate their boundaries."

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion, except that LW doesn't seem to think that such a thing would be a good trade from his viewpoint. Also, she has already revealed herself to be a bad-faith negotiator, so he's understandably resistant to negotiating.
Feb 12 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
@123: You're about as shitty a sophist as LW1's girlfriend.

A: She wants permission to step outside her monogamous relationship, but in exchange he only gets an equivalent permission that he finds completely useless. Asking for something you want desperately in exchange for something that you know the other person gets nothing out of is bad-faith bargaining. At this point he ought to be reevaluating who she has revealed herself to be: a bad-faith bargainer. At very least she is selfish and stupid, if she cannot see that she is offering him a completely one-sided bargain.

If she's all that hot to find this out about herself, she is free to leave the relationship and explore her sexuality to her tiny little heart's content, without infringing on her ex-boyfriend's freedom. But she wants to have her cake (keep the relationship, keep the security of monogamy from him) and eat it too (fuck around on him), while offering him cake (her) plus all the garbage he can eat.

She wants to have all the freedom, while assuming none of the risk herself. If she is bi, it is absolutely a risk that she might get just as emotionally entangled with another woman as he might with another woman. If this is unexplored territory to her, she can't make any promises on that score. "Don't worry honey, I won't fall in love with anyone," is an empty promise.

B:There is a lot more to a woman than breasts and a clit. Should you ever mention the word "objectification" in future, the only merited response would be a horse-laugh. If all she needs is an extra pussy to mess with, she can go buy herself a Fleshlight.

C: see A, above. She's a bad faith negotiator.
Feb 10 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
@16: I've never had sex with an 18 year old Asian. Should I be expected to forfeit that part of my sexual exploration forever, for the sake of monogamy? That's just cruel.

Yeah, no.
Feb 10 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
@8: I will admit to having read "women" plural where Letter Writer said "woman" singular. Dan was the first one to mention "women" plural and I must have transplanted it. My bad.

@20: "She's not denying her boyfriend the same privilege. She's saying he can explore his same-sex desires. It's not her fault he doesn't have any."

That is a near-perfect analog to the argument used by anti-same-sex-marriage contingent. Homosexuals have the exact same right to marry someone of the opposite sex that heteros do. What is there to complain of?

Frankly I expected better from you.
Feb 7 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
That first girlfriend is a classic example of the stereotype of the selfish-entitled-as-fuck bi person. And they show up right here in the column with a fair amount of regularity.

You should tell her, "So, the deal you are offering is that you get to fuck me (to whom you are attracted), plus a bunch of other women (to whom you are attracted). While I get to fuck you (to whom i am attracted) and other men (to whom I am not attracted in the least). In other words, you get as many partners as you want, while I continue to get exactly one. In fact, maybe my number is going to end up being zero, because I suddenly find that I'm not attracted to selfish, entitled, manipulative, deeply shitty sophists."

Or you could say it in fewer syllables: "Bye, asshole."
Feb 1 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
"if you're not able to focus on her alone at eight weeks—maybe sexual exclusivity isn't the right choice for you."

Or, more simply, that _she_ isn't the right choice for you. Even for a hypothetically non-monogamous person, eight weeks is an astonishingly short time for New Relationship Energy to abate badly enough to need to write to an advice columnist about a crushing need for others.

There isn't a lot of evidence in the letter that the writer is strongly non-mongamous; merely strongly oriented on male sexuality, even if bi.
Jan 9 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Snooper Boyfriend Keeps Snooping Through Passed Out Girlfriend's Phone.
I doubt the difference in his reaction to finding texts confirming a tryst versus actually walking in on one is going to make much difference in whether or how fast he DTMFA's her. That hair hardly seems worth splitting.

Taking his description at face value, my vote is on DTMFA.
Dec 30, 2016 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Dispatched To (And a Dispatch From) the So-Called "Friend Zone".
Letter Writer, it's been years. Where in all of this is the conspicuously absent girlfriend, the one that you should have been involved with since long long ago, shortly after the first time you wrote Kathy out of your life?

For gods' sake, put down the torch and focus your attention on someone who hasn't been telling you the whole time that you are as firmly in the "Platonic Only" category as if your feet were encased in concrete.