Mar 2
Gaudior commented on The President Speaks About Marriage Equality: "We are all created equal applies to everybody.".
Jan 30
Gaudior commented on Savage Love.
Marty Klein's advice is excellent, especially about the questions to ask a potential therapist! When dealing with a new therapist, your sense of whether or not you're comfortable with them is always your best way of knowing whether or not you'll work together well.
I would like to add, though, that if you're looking for a sex-positive therapist, a great place to look is the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom's Kink-Aware Professionals listing (KAP):
https://ncsfreedom.org/key-programs/kink…
It's a place where therapists (as well as lawyers, doctors, etc) can list themselves as being knowledgeable about and open to kinky clients-- and it's national (plus Canada), so it greatly improves your chances of finding someone in your area.
I would like to add, though, that if you're looking for a sex-positive therapist, a great place to look is the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom's Kink-Aware Professionals listing (KAP):
https://ncsfreedom.org/key-programs/kink…
It's a place where therapists (as well as lawyers, doctors, etc) can list themselves as being knowledgeable about and open to kinky clients-- and it's national (plus Canada), so it greatly improves your chances of finding someone in your area.
Jan 9
Gaudior commented on Savage Love.
I'm just really pleased with how much Dan has clearly thought about and rethought his discussion of trans people. The answer to WSOWS-- "You made an exception for this woman's dick because her dick is exceptional: It's attached to a woman,"-- was, IMO, excellently trans-supportive, helpful, and, best of all, accurate. This does not sound like what he would have written fifteen years ago, which might have made the same point, but would probably have done so in a way that really hurt people and made them feel excluded and unwelcome. I like how this answer has his classic snark ("You're now doing the second-gayest thing a guy can do. You're being a huge drama queen about the whole thing.") without any unintended bashing. Go, Dan!
Dec 19, 2012
Gaudior commented on Savage Love.
Generally excellent advice for NOPE, Dan, thank you! The one important caveat is that, at least in the US, if you're under 18, your medical records are legally property of your parents, not you. A good adolescent shrink will make it clear to both teen and parents that the therapy will go better if parents never take advantage of that right-- but no therapist can promise you the same kind of absolute confidentiality they could promise an adult.
Also, this may not be useful for NOPE, as she's in Australia, but people in the US or Canada may have better luck looking for specifically kink-friendly therapists in the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom's Kink-Aware Professionals listing: https://ncsfreedom.org/resources/kink-aw…
Also, this may not be useful for NOPE, as she's in Australia, but people in the US or Canada may have better luck looking for specifically kink-friendly therapists in the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom's Kink-Aware Professionals listing: https://ncsfreedom.org/resources/kink-aw…
Dec 16, 2012
Gaudior commented on Teachers Are "Parasites" and "Terrorists".
@19 and 20 (NealB and Supreme Ruler of the Universe)--
Please don't look at someone who just lived through a massacre and complain that she "shows no despair" or "seemed rather distant." That is an absolutely common, standard, and even healthy reaction to trauma. People who have been through something too frightening or violating or terrible to stand usually dissociate from their feelings-- mentally put all the terror, grief, and fury aside, because they need to function. They need to think rationally enough to, say, hide their students and lie to gunman about their whereabouts-- and you can't do that effectively while you're experiencing feelings as intense as what you're actually feeling. So the emotions get locked down, and they don't necessarily all come out the second the experience is over. For really severe things, it can be years until people let themselves feel the fear, anger, and sadness of terrible experiences.
So, yeah, you're not seeing people look upset. But that's probably because what they went through upset them more than it upset people who didn't go through it, not less. They'll (hopefully) show that later, when they're sure they're safe, not right now, hours after the event, with television cameras in their faces.
Also, maybe you could try not being an asshole to people who just lost friends and colleagues, and nearly died horribly?
More...
Please don't look at someone who just lived through a massacre and complain that she "shows no despair" or "seemed rather distant." That is an absolutely common, standard, and even healthy reaction to trauma. People who have been through something too frightening or violating or terrible to stand usually dissociate from their feelings-- mentally put all the terror, grief, and fury aside, because they need to function. They need to think rationally enough to, say, hide their students and lie to gunman about their whereabouts-- and you can't do that effectively while you're experiencing feelings as intense as what you're actually feeling. So the emotions get locked down, and they don't necessarily all come out the second the experience is over. For really severe things, it can be years until people let themselves feel the fear, anger, and sadness of terrible experiences.
So, yeah, you're not seeing people look upset. But that's probably because what they went through upset them more than it upset people who didn't go through it, not less. They'll (hopefully) show that later, when they're sure they're safe, not right now, hours after the event, with television cameras in their faces.
Also, maybe you could try not being an asshole to people who just lost friends and colleagues, and nearly died horribly?
Nov 28, 2012
Gaudior commented on Savage Love.
@51 (drjones) said: "You guys are all assuming that 'naturally nonmonogamous' means that everyone wants to screw as many people as possible at all times. I believe when Dan uses the phrase he means that our minds and libidos are not irreparably attached to one partner for all time. You don't have to be having sex with more than one person to be non monogomous by nature, you just have to look at a passerby and think they look hot."
But the thing is, I know people who don't do that. Who look at passersby without the passersby's hotness even occurring to them.
My favorite example: I was at an anime convention with some friends, including one monogamous straight guy, who was there with his wife. A smoking hot girl walked by wearing a Pikachu-fur bikini, with a sign that designated her a Pokemon hunter, and an elaborately-designed glaive (that's a pole-arm). We all (including his wife, who's kinda bi) turned to stare at the girl as we went by. My friend said, "Wow... nice glaive!"
But the thing is, he was really confused when we all started laughing, because he wasn't kidding. He genuinely wasn't attracted to the girl-- didn't even notice her as "person who is sexy" rather than "person who made a cool prop weapon." And he's always like that-- it's not just that he didn't find that particular person attractive. Attraction, for him, is unidirectional, and it's always aimed towards his wife.
Now, like I said, I don't work this way, and I don't think the majority of people do. But some do, and I wish Dan (and everyone else here) would stop saying that they don't.
More...
But the thing is, I know people who don't do that. Who look at passersby without the passersby's hotness even occurring to them.
My favorite example: I was at an anime convention with some friends, including one monogamous straight guy, who was there with his wife. A smoking hot girl walked by wearing a Pikachu-fur bikini, with a sign that designated her a Pokemon hunter, and an elaborately-designed glaive (that's a pole-arm). We all (including his wife, who's kinda bi) turned to stare at the girl as we went by. My friend said, "Wow... nice glaive!"
But the thing is, he was really confused when we all started laughing, because he wasn't kidding. He genuinely wasn't attracted to the girl-- didn't even notice her as "person who is sexy" rather than "person who made a cool prop weapon." And he's always like that-- it's not just that he didn't find that particular person attractive. Attraction, for him, is unidirectional, and it's always aimed towards his wife.
Now, like I said, I don't work this way, and I don't think the majority of people do. But some do, and I wish Dan (and everyone else here) would stop saying that they don't.
Nov 28, 2012
Gaudior commented on Savage Love.
I agree strongly with Functional Atheist (@26)-- the fact that lots of people are nonmonogamous does not mean that everyone is.
I suspect it seems that way to Dan because his sample is very large-- hundreds and thousands of letters over many years-- but is also skewed towards people to whom a) sex is very important (important enough to write to a letters columnist) and b) sex is causing them some kind of problem they believe can be solved (which is more likely if you're one of the people for whom, for whatever reason, the "accepted" "mainstream" "traditional" way of doing things doesn't work, and c) are not very "traditional" anyway, because if they were, they'd be writing to Dear Abby. I believe that, in Dan's (admittedly very, very, large experience), almost no-one is naturally monogamous.
But that sample is skewed. There are people for whom monogamy simply works better-- not just because of their social conditioning, but because of how they're wired. I am not such a person, but I've had enough conversations with some to know that they do exist. And it's insulting and unhelpful to them to tell them they don't.
And sure, if you want to call it an "identity" rather than an "orientation," go ahead. If you want to note that polyamory is one very distinct form of nonmonagomy, chosen by the participants and different from other types of behavior (cheating, lusting after people but not acting on it, etc), like gromm (@28) said, go for it.
But it is really annoying to insist that in this one area (how many people you're attracted to) everyone is the same, even though we acknowledge a wide spectrum of different ways to be in just about every other area of sexuality.
More...
I suspect it seems that way to Dan because his sample is very large-- hundreds and thousands of letters over many years-- but is also skewed towards people to whom a) sex is very important (important enough to write to a letters columnist) and b) sex is causing them some kind of problem they believe can be solved (which is more likely if you're one of the people for whom, for whatever reason, the "accepted" "mainstream" "traditional" way of doing things doesn't work, and c) are not very "traditional" anyway, because if they were, they'd be writing to Dear Abby. I believe that, in Dan's (admittedly very, very, large experience), almost no-one is naturally monogamous.
But that sample is skewed. There are people for whom monogamy simply works better-- not just because of their social conditioning, but because of how they're wired. I am not such a person, but I've had enough conversations with some to know that they do exist. And it's insulting and unhelpful to them to tell them they don't.
And sure, if you want to call it an "identity" rather than an "orientation," go ahead. If you want to note that polyamory is one very distinct form of nonmonagomy, chosen by the participants and different from other types of behavior (cheating, lusting after people but not acting on it, etc), like gromm (@28) said, go for it.
But it is really annoying to insist that in this one area (how many people you're attracted to) everyone is the same, even though we acknowledge a wide spectrum of different ways to be in just about every other area of sexuality.
Nov 21, 2012
Gaudior commented on Savage Love.
I disagree that poly is never an orientation, because I know people (only two of them, one man and one woman) who are simply, naturally monogamous-- genuinely don't feel and can't sustain an attraction to more than one person at once. Similarly, I know some people who are simply, naturally poly-- fall in love equally with multiple people and simply don't feel jealousy when their partners have other partners. I think the vast majority of us do not fall into either of these categories, but somewhere in the middle, and for the majority of us, Dan's advice-- look at this as behavior, not orientation-- makes sense. But not for everyone.
Oct 27, 2012
Gaudior commented on Not Everyone Is Looking Forward to Heteroween.
@29 (Ken Mehlman)-- The difference between being attracted to a person and objectification is that in the first, you're attracted to a *person*. In the second, not only are you thinking about the body parts, but you really don't care very much how the person attached to those body parts feels about it-- she's there for *your* pleasure, and as far as you're concerned, attracting you should be her major motivation in life.
The problem with "sexy Halloween costumes" is that on a day devoted to people exploring all the things they could possibly be, it *assumes* that a major thing women want to be is sexy. If I want to dress up as a zombie, it's probably because I want to play with ideas about death, scariness, infection, etc. If the option I'm given at the costume store is just "sexy zombie," then that assumes that the *most* interesting thing to me about the costume is that other people find it attractive, not what *I* might want to think about while I'm wearing it.
The problem with "sexy Halloween costumes" is that on a day devoted to people exploring all the things they could possibly be, it *assumes* that a major thing women want to be is sexy. If I want to dress up as a zombie, it's probably because I want to play with ideas about death, scariness, infection, etc. If the option I'm given at the costume store is just "sexy zombie," then that assumes that the *most* interesting thing to me about the costume is that other people find it attractive, not what *I* might want to think about while I'm wearing it.
Sep 11, 2012
Gaudior commented on Pat Robertson Wishes You Could Beat Your Wife.
@37: I agree that world-wide, the problem of male partners beating female partners is much more common and societally-reinforced.
Which is part of why it's so troubling when a man actually *is* being abused, (and/or a woman actually is being abusive)-- because he won't get the same kind of support a woman might (though obviously not from the dangerously misguided Mr. Robertson) under the same circumstances. It is horribly, horribly wrong to tell such a man that he should "just hit back," or hit harder, or "put his wife in her place" or some such-- not just because it reinforces the narrative of men enforcing their dominance with violence, but because it tells him that he should be *ashamed* of being abused, that he wouldn't *be* abused if he were a "real man."
I can see lots of ways in which Robertson's hideous advice would be terrible for the wife in this circumstance. But I can also see a lot of ways it could also be terrible for the husband.
Which is part of why it's so troubling when a man actually *is* being abused, (and/or a woman actually is being abusive)-- because he won't get the same kind of support a woman might (though obviously not from the dangerously misguided Mr. Robertson) under the same circumstances. It is horribly, horribly wrong to tell such a man that he should "just hit back," or hit harder, or "put his wife in her place" or some such-- not just because it reinforces the narrative of men enforcing their dominance with violence, but because it tells him that he should be *ashamed* of being abused, that he wouldn't *be* abused if he were a "real man."
I can see lots of ways in which Robertson's hideous advice would be terrible for the wife in this circumstance. But I can also see a lot of ways it could also be terrible for the husband.
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
I don't think he retracts it-- the Obama administration then went on to do everything he asked there. They would have roundly deserved the "fuck you" if they had not done so, and kept claiming to be GLBT allies.
But since then, they've actually proven themselves to be good allies. So that "fuck you" (along with many, many others, some phrased differently) seems like it did exactly what it was meant to do.
Yay!