http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/02/08/sl-letter-of-the-day Comments On: SL Letter of the Day: Today's DTMFA by Dan Savage en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Mon, 20 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Mon, 20 May 2013 12:30:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
One of my friends was closeted, even to himself, and had a random hookup at a party where he got sucked off by a dude. When he told me about it, he lamented that he'd now have to tell all future girlfriends about it, and that he'd be permanently bi. In that case, I didn't see how that history was at all relevant if it was a one-time thing and he had no interest in repeating it; having a same-sex encounter isn't a virus you're stuck with and should be obligated to disclose at all times.

@65: While I agree that a new SO shouldn't automatically take priority over existing friendships, it should also be acknowledged and respected by the hub and friends that the new person will, even in the best of circumstances, know that they're an interloper and be nervous about making waves. So it would be respectful for friends (and definitely exes) to give some respectful space as the new relationship feels things out to reduce some of the pressure to get along with everyone immediately.
Posted by MemeGene]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 10:05:53 -0800 The Stranger
Why wouldn't I want to share my history? Because I don't need to describe or account for every single encounter, really. If it was significant, I've already told them.

"sorry, your p.o.v. just sounds really shallow."

I can understand being chuffed about the perceived interference in the former part o f your post, but not feeling like I have to or need to "confess" my entire sexual history isn't grounds for this. Some people leave a mark for good and ill, some people are just a temporary part of what makes you who you are.
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Tue, 12 Feb 2013 09:48:31 -0800 The Stranger also, why wouldn't you want to share your history with a partner? and if that is the case, why are you even there?!? and don't they have some ...right? need?... to know which of your friends you have and haven't had sex with/ lived with/ mutual ex's with, etc.... otherwise things just get too complicated.
sorry, your p.o.v. just sounds really shallow.

@57 - yes, all that. thank gods for old friends. and... now you know who really are your friends. :-)
Posted by sappho]]> Mon, 11 Feb 2013 19:29:04 -0800 The Stranger Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:31:55 -0800 The Stranger Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:29:35 -0800 The Stranger
1. Knowing the parties' ages would be helpful. If he is 28 and she is 23, she would have a lot more of my sympathy than if they were both 45.

2. Where did this LW get the idea that it was a good idea to be open and honest about everything that comes up in a relationship? If I take him at his word, I can see why his girlfriend would be uncomfortable knowing intimate details of his past sexual conquests. Truth isn't more important than making your partner feel inadequate.

3. The debate between IPJ and nocute at 39 & 40 is intersting. I think its admirable to maintain a cordial or even a friendly relationship with exes. But monogamous couples often require some of their own space too. I have been invited to some of my exes weddings, but if our relationship was once serious, I don't go out of respect for the new couple.

4. They are incompatible.
Posted by Tim Horton]]> Mon, 11 Feb 2013 06:23:26 -0800 The Stranger
I'm not claiming that's going on here. Letter Writer actively disclaims it (I assume he is smart enough to know that "respectful of my relationship" would tend to disallow his exes casually draping themselves on him, either physically or conversationally). I'm just saying that it isn't always categorically out of bounds for a new partner to be radically uncomfortable with exes who maintain an active, friendly relationship with one's partner.
Posted by avast2006]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 22:17:41 -0800 The Stranger Posted by shurenka]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 21:09:00 -0800 The Stranger
I can also understand the GF feeling insecure if she has had less experience, or has never been with someone who had a lot of friendly exes in the wings. But ultimately, it means she isn't mature enough to be in this relationship.

A much better conversation is: what are your views on (casual) sex, cheating, and remaining friends with exes.
Posted by shurenka]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 21:00:41 -0800 The Stranger Posted by yucca flower]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 18:43:37 -0800 The Stranger he had never had the opportunity to rack up the same numbers and experiences that I had. In the end, to appease him I cut them all out of my life, and later agreed to open up our marriage to afford him the chance of broadening his sexual horizons. Because, as I told our girlfriend at the time to whom he is now married, I am nothing if not accommodating. They no longer speak to me at all, but, thank god, my old friends were more forgiving and have taken me back into the fold.
From my perspective, if they are hung up on your past and threatened by your friends, you can twist your self into any number of inventive pretzel shapes and it won't ever be enough. Because it isn't about you, and things you obviously can't undo. It's about them, and a basic incompatibility of world views.


Posted by Lissa]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 13:39:41 -0800 The Stranger
It's not really. As long as they only want you and knowing their status of health, knowing specifically how many partners your partner has had before you is unnecessary. Knowing that they've had at least one, more than a few is helpful to figure out what waits in store, but enumerating them all? Ridiculous.

"In addition, I think people who see sex as fundamentally a personal experience and those who see it as a fun activity to do with others are usually incompatible."

I don't understand how one could ever isolate the two with an airgap, they are not mutually exclusive. I'd think more negatively about someone who would only think in such a binary than specifically which side they found themselves on.
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 11:56:36 -0800 The Stranger I also don't agree that there is a pattern that all disgruntled letter writers use. I can see two possible reasons for FAILING's writing to Dan:
1) He genuinely wants advice on how to make things better.
2) He wants permission to break up with the girlfriend and he also wants affirmation that he's a ggg, sex-positive, evolved kind of guy.

Posted by nocutename]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 11:11:37 -0800 The Stranger
In addition, I think people who see sex as fundamentally a personal experience and those who see it as a fun activity to do with others are usually incompatible.
Posted by alguna_rubia]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 11:05:21 -0800 The Stranger
Dan, remember that study that showed that queers who are out have lower levels of stress hormones than straight guys? Remember your hypothesis about that? That straight guys have to continue to police their own behavior all their lives, lest someone think a behavior is "faggy" or "girly"?

Your experience is your experience, of course, but you are implying that either he's an over-sharer or he's not straight.

Mildly vexed,
--A linguistically punctilious straight guy
Posted by A linguistically punctilious straight guy]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:22:08 -0800 The Stranger
I didn't mean to imply that slut shaming is a lesser offense if done by a woman to a man. In my mind, the sex of the offender and the victim is irrelevant.
Posted by Alanmt]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:10:22 -0800 The Stranger
Normally I'd maintain that anyone who merits the MF deserves the D in either DTMFA or TMFDM. It's a potentially interesting concept that one could be an MF without deserving the particular D in question. It feels rather religious, as if, essentially, all humans are MFs and avoid the big D not through our own merits but in the mercy of the non-dumper.

Assuming that this all stems from her asking and not his oversharing, I can more or less get this one into the area of being a non-unringable bell. On my three-tiered (so far) system of dumping, breaking up and ending relationships, my estimate before cross-examination is that this would fit into the breakup category, although she may not be ready yet for the INYIM that would be the classic breakup line. I'd probably have a better opinion of her were she to break up with him than if she were to continue to try to move the relationship forward while simultaneously insinuating (exactly how, one wonders) that he should feel ashamed of his past. There are worse kinks than wanting a partner walking around in permanent penitence, but it's not a nice thing into which to push a partner who doesn't embrace it with full enthusiastic consent.

Just to clarify, I'm not driven to be particular about dumping implying cause out of a desire to punish the guilty, but rather from wanting to safeguard the innocent. With DTMFA catching on so, it seems a worthy cause to try to prevent anyone being saddled with a scarlet MF label as a result of being the object of an inaccurately perceived D.
Posted by vennominon]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 08:40:23 -0800 The Stranger
@49: "Don't work so hard to keep up your relationships with your exes. etc"

Yeah, even aside from the "jealousy", it's an issue of prioritization. Do you really need so many besties when you have a partner?
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Sun, 10 Feb 2013 08:31:37 -0800 The Stranger
A lot of the time the tone I get in these letters or the comments/responses is that any sign of jealousy makes the jealous person an insecure jerk. But I think sometimes it's just someone figuring out those boundaries and finally trying to communicate them to someone they may both love and fear losing. So while one person may say "It's all good as long as there's no vaginal/anal/oral/masturbation", another might say "No going out on 'platonic' dates". Neither of those things seem unreasonable to me, but I think it's important to get on the same page for those things pretty early on. I know I wouldn't want to go out with someone who would go on and on about the fun time they just had with their ex-sex partner, even if they are now just friends. Does that make me insecure? Sure but consider this befoer calling me a jerk: If you are into monogamy then there is something your partner could do to push your insecure button. Flirt in front of you. Make comments in front of you to their friend about how hot your neighbor is. Disappear into the coat check area with said neighbor. Be in bed with someone who is not you when you get home. It's a sliding scale, and you're not a jerk if it's not just the last item that could make you concerned.

And if you really want to be in an exclusive relationship, then you should expect to modify your behavior a bit from free agent mode. Stop flirting. Don't work so hard to keep up your relationships with your exes. etc.

Posted by TheBigRagu]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 22:23:50 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Registered European]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 19:12:41 -0800 The Stranger
I lost track of how often we had the argument where I tried to make clear to her that she couldn't demand trust of anyone as a precondition for the beginning of a relationship. Her reply was that I was defensive because I had something to hide, just like all of the other people we knew in common. The endless refrain was, "[X] is a dishonest person." It got to the point where I was like, "People are dishonest with you because of YOU."

When I finally ended it, I felt so free, so much that I had a glimpse into why some men descend into misogynistic rants about harping and manipulative women. And I learned a valuable lesson about spotting emotional abusive behavior when dating women.

Again, projecting... but I'm with the guy on this one.

If he isn't a self-congratulatory asshat.
Posted by maddy811]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 18:50:15 -0800 The Stranger Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 18:19:28 -0800 The Stranger Posted by pavloviandoggy]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 17:11:19 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Alanmt]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 15:45:03 -0800 The Stranger Posted by lolorhone]]> Sat, 09 Feb 2013 15:29:07 -0800 The Stranger