report this user
Aug 10 avast2006 commented on Savage Love.
@UMW: You didn't mention how often you and your wife _do_ fuck. That's kind of important. "There's nothing you can do to make sex more appealing to me," means something a hell of lot different when you are fucking once a month than when you are already fucking once a day. I expect your frequency is somewhere in between, but you get the idea. Is she being frigid or are you being greedy? Be honest, now.

Second, how many brain cells does it take to figure out that maybe you should try to time your attempts at initiating when the two of you aren't just about to go do something else that fucking would interrupt? From over here in the peanut gallery, it looks like you are trying to test her. Does she love me/desire me enough to abandon existing plans? Miss the first half of the the party? Lose the reservation at the restaurant? Go hungry? Even if that wasn't your intent, that ends up being your effect. Show a little common sense.
Aug 6 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Punting.
I admit that my worldview is a little obsolete on this. I haven't quite grasped the modern convenience factor that is Tinder.
Aug 6 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Punting.
@25: I don't disagree with you about the passive-aggressive nature of what he did, or about who dislikes it more that their partner is seeing other people. It is hard to tell from the letter which of them pushed for nonmonogamy, and which one went along for the ride. The fact that he wanted to go all the way back to monogamy to fix this sounds like he doesn't like the way the current arrangements work for him.

@26: It's hard to speculate on how much notice she gets from work on her travel schedule. She could well be doing a trade show circuit and the whole year is arranged in advance. Or she could be doing on-site customer support and it's completely random. But the bottom line is that permission to fuck or be prohibited from doing so hinges 100% on her schedule, not his.

I was going on the assumption that it's pretty easy to hook up in a bar after hours at a conference in an exotic location. The downside of developing relationships at home is that he is expected to put them on hold as soon as LW arrives at the airport. Putting myself in the position of one of these fallback relationship people, I think that arrangement would have me describing myself with words like "expedient" and convenient." Not a happy place.
Aug 6 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Punting.
Seems to me the biggest difference between this letter and Sugar's narrative is not how abjectly contrite Mr. Sugar was, but that there is no evidence in Sugar's story about an agreement to practice nonmonogamy in the first place.

I get that he broke an agreement. I get that he stood her up and couldn't even be bothered to contact her. I get that he lied about it both by omission and to her face, for a whole long day, and thereby revealed himself to be capable of that: a lying liar who lies. I get that he used being drunk as an excuse, which it is not. If he were the one who wrote in, I would be more than happy to berate him at length over all of the above. At the same time, however, I have limited patience for her butthurt about, "ZOMG, now I can't help imagining him doing that thing with this woman, that thing he has total permission to do as long as I am out of state."

The obsession over the hickeys, along with "though imagining my partner having sex with someone else isn't too fun," speaks volumes to me. Letter Writer wants permission to be nonmonogamous, while pretending all the while that it isn't really happening. She engages in it herself, but if she sees evidence that he is doing what she herself does, it throws her into a tailspin.

What it sounds like to me is that she engineered the rules to promote the impression that she is Absolute Number One Priority in his life, and did it via this set of rules that de-facto imposes more limitations on him than it does on her. He ran up against those limitations (probably more than once), rebelled against them (this time), and as a result she has to look at something -- that he fucks other people -- that she would prefer not to look at because it feels threatening.

My impression is that neither of them is ready to practice honest nonmonogamy.
Aug 6 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Punting.
There are things about this agreement that look less than fair to me:

LW stipulates that when they are home together, no side action. Okay. But _she_is the one who travels all the time. So she is in control not only of when she sleeps around, but when he does. Sounds like she gets that itch scratched by hooking up with randos while traveling. But he has to pursue nonmonogamy in his home territory, unless he makes an effort to prowl the whole state while she's away. Meaning that the available pool of dates is way more limited (by geography) for him than it is for her.

It also means he has to cut off contact the moment LW gets home. Putting myself in the shoes of his dates, I would get sick of that pretty quickly. I don't think it requires sexist assumptions to conclude she has a better shot at getting as much side action as she wants than he does.

That does not excuse him from breaking the agreement, nor of the things he did wrong in the course of breaking it (radio silence, lying his ass off). But LW should take some responsibility for the rules turning into an inherently unbalanced situation. They need to start from scratch, and reset the rules more in depth, as well as negotiate some of the sticking points to be more equitable.
Jul 30 avast2006 commented on SL Letter of the Day: In Demand.
Dang it, I missed that this was a repeat.

LW wrote in that time, and said they were open to both partners having other partners too. So it isn't the unbalanced agreement that I had mistaken it for (twice now).
Jul 30 avast2006 commented on SL Letter of the Day: In Demand.
"I want to be in a romantic, sexually committed relationship with a man and a woman at the same time."

Not to nitpick, but I think what you want is to be in TWO romantic, sexually committed relationshipS, with a man and a woman, at the same time. That's a pretty significant difference.

"This could possibly involve three-way sex, but probably not."

Like I said, two relationships. Even if you formed a triad, what would you do, only allow one partner in the bed with you at a time?

"It is more about sharing my life intimately with both a man and a woman."

Or more accurately, sharing HALF your life with both a man and a woman, each. Time is a finite resource and is not elastic.

You might want to re-examine what "sexually committed" means to you, too. If you are sexually committed to one person, then that person is sexually committed to you, which under the default definition implies monogamy. So you have two people, each "sexually committed" to you, while you are sexually committed to that person, but also to someone else at the same time. That doesn't strike you as an unbalanced agreement? If they are as free to have a relationship other than with you as you are with them, what does their commitment to that other person unconnected you mean to your definition of "sexually committed?"

I just get the impression you haven't thought this through as much as you need to.

"Unfortunately, I don't know if I will ever find that perfect balance because so far all my potential serious partners have been turned off by the idea that I want to be with two people and believed that I should "get over it" and just be in a monogamous relationship with them—straight or gay."

Thought so. They go in expecting a monogamous commitment. Your phrasing suggests you expect the same FROM them but don't want to give it TO them. Or at least they think that's what you want, if you are using terms like "sexually committed" with them.

"Should I keep searching? Is what I want as valid as what other people want?"

If what you want is as valid as what other people want, then what other people want is as valid as what you want. This means you had better do your best to find people who want the same thing you do. So yes, keep searching.
Jul 27 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: My Loving Wife, The Dicktease.
If you want an honest communication with her, I would suggest that every time she does one of those dicktease moves, act pleased and attempt to take her up on it. When she turns you down, ask her, "Why did you do that?" Every single time. Get her to examine her behavior.
Jul 27 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: My Loving Wife, The Dicktease.
@3: "She wants to be desired and she wants to be seen as sexual but she may or may not actually want to fuck you (and if you think about it... that's ok). "

No, actually, that isn't okay at all. It's using you. Would it be okay for you to want to be seen as a great chef, to make a point of creating elaborate feasts, sitting her down before a steaming plate, taking a photo of her and her meal (for the benefit of all your Facebook friends) and then 9 times out of 10 whisking away the plates before she could take a bite? And let her go hungry? Perhaps tell her she's welcome to get herself a bowl of cold cereal afterwards? You'd be a fucking psychopath.

"Let her know - or smile and pretend very convincingly (for months if you must) that she is turning you on and that you like the dick teasing. If you don't come to like it, you can stop."

Wrong. You never, ever train someone to do something to you that you actually don't like. What does that get you? Lots and lots of the activity that you don't even like, when they could be spending that same time actually pleasing you. That, and a confused spouse who doesn't understand when you finally come clean about hating it, after encouraging it for months. You have just admitted to lying to them, and they will lose trust in your word. But at least it explains the constant shitty mood that you aren't actually quite good enough of an actor to conceal.

I notice you aren't in that relationship any more.
Jul 20 avast2006 commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Different Day, Different Couple, Same Issues, Same Advice.
""I am the man here, you need to ask my permission for things, but I don't need to ask you."

That should earn him a derisive laugh and a "Srsly? Get out. Grow up. Come back after you've grown up."