Savage Love by Dan Savage - Seattle Columns - Savage Love - Dan Savage

1

letter #1 makes me wonder if boundary-ignoring hubby is like this in other aspects. or did he bring the MFF threesome up as a way to fuck other women without being a CPOS? hmm?

Posted by scary tyler moore

on February 28, 2012 at 5:17 PM · Report

2

@1

"did he bring the MFF threesome up as a way to fuck other women without being a CPOS?"

If so, he screwed that plan up royally by being a POS.

Posted by blah on February 28, 2012 at 5:21 PM · Report

3

Some women do the arbitrary no penis in vagina rule as a way to avoid potential "third" pregnancy. Having worked for a lawyer, I can tell you those are really awkward custody battles.

Posted by AniaOnion on February 28, 2012 at 5:39 PM · Report

4

Well said Dan!

Posted by SexEd on February 28, 2012 at 5:39 PM · Report

5

Yay, I'm the first to comment AND it's my first time commenting - first time registered but long time fan and reader. Jolly well said Dan!

Posted by SexEd on February 28, 2012 at 5:41 PM · Report

6

@5 welcome!

For Heartbroken, I wonder what this means: "I was completely down with every other aspect of the threesome."

I'd love to hear that meant "I enjoyed seeing him enjoy himself, and give her pleasure, and I was more aroused than I thought I would be."

If that's the case, and assuming your husband follows Dan's advice and apologies to you, then you might see if you can reframe the threesome as a hot adventure, for yourself, during a private masturbatory session. If so, then try talking about it in a sexy way with your husband (either as equals, or saying he was a bad boy, or whatever else comes to mind). If you decide to move forward and share more adventures with him, I think that will work best if you can forgive & forget what he did, and give him another honest chance to get it right.

But if your phrase meant: "It wasn't as bad as I thought, and I was proud of myself for being so GGG, even though I wasn't aroused" -- then just work on rebuilding your trust in your marriage in other ways, and maybe plan an adventure to which you both can look forward.

Posted by EricaP on February 28, 2012 at 6:02 PM · Report

7

What a stupid motherfucker Heartbroken's husband is. And what a stupid motherfucker SLASH is about to be. I think these 2 are a match made in whatever imaginary plain of existence one happens to believe in.

Posted by catballou on February 28, 2012 at 6:06 PM · Report

8

Hey SLASH, you do understand the basic concept that unwanted sexual contact is emotionally upsetting? Is it part of your "biggest fantasy of all" to bail your husband out of jail after he throws the bi guy naked down the hotel stairwell? 'Cause that's the situation you are basically setting up.

Posted by avast2006 on February 28, 2012 at 6:10 PM · Report

9

Much as I love Dan's response to Heartbroken, I wish there were some advice in there. He answers the question that yes, she is justified in feeling hurt. There's nothing about how to get over the hurt or whether she should get over the hurt or how to heal the relationship or whether she'd be better off dumping the motherfucker now rather than later. The advice is for Heartbroken's husband on how to get more of what he wants. I don't think a plausible explanation and abject apology is going to cut it in this case, but even if it were, there's nothing on how Heartbroken herself can get what she wants-- unless she wants an explanation and apology in which case, see the bit about that not cutting it.

Posted by Crinoline on February 28, 2012 at 6:13 PM · Report

10

If the problem is she doesn't want to be touched by another woman after her abuse then why can't WIYCCUW do her MFF with the strict rule of no sexual contact with the other woman? Anyone worth sleeping with is going to be very sympathetic and understanding about this issue.

No same sex sexual contact is a totally reasonable preference. This is normally what guys do in a MMF...

Dan hit them all out of the park with exceptionally good, interesting, AND very educational answers this week.

Posted by Professor on February 28, 2012 at 6:22 PM · Report

11

@9 --

Now that you put it that way, I can see how it's problematic. If it helps -- I read it first as not entirely aimed at the husband, but at other people who might be tempted to pull the same POS move. It's "you, motherfucker, could have gotten what you want, but you fucked it up by being a POS" -- which doesn't change the fact that the motherfucker has been a POS (and the recommendation that he immediately start respecting his wife, who was not a POS and has done nothing wrong and thus doesn't need to be told what to do differently), but might serve as an object lesson in turning other potential POSes away from POShood. That said -- yeah, the focus on the stupid motherfucker rather than the injured party is a mistake.

Posted by MGroesbeck on February 28, 2012 at 7:20 PM · Report

12

I'd also like to know what that "plausible explanation" might consist of. Even if he were lying, what might Heartbroken's husband say? What explanation/excuse is there that doesn't boil down to "I really wanted to so I did it"?

Abducted by aliens?

Or, "I thought you'd changed your mind because you didn't object at the moment"? I'm guessing that's what he'll come up with, a sort of "this is your fault" coupled with "I decided you were being unreasonable so I ignored you" which goes back to "I really wanted to so I did it"?

I hope Heartbroken doesn't fall for that. If she does, she's setting herself up for more being ignored. Once she accepts that sort of logic, he can ignore anything she says, or she can never say anything without knowing ahead of time what he'd accept as the proper amount of objection in order to be listened to.

I think this might be one where the problem isn't that he could have had great sexual adventures if he'd only listened to his wife. The problem is that he now needs to spend the rest of his life trying to regain his wife's trust.

Posted by Crinoline on February 28, 2012 at 7:39 PM · Report

13

@9, 12,

I, for one, think the situation is not as dire as you present it. I think there's a decent chance she'd accept a "plausible explanation and an abject apology."

Not a plausible explanation that suggests it was really her fault, but one that owns up to his responsibility. Something like this: "I knew you didn't want me to do that, but I got swept up in the moment. It was a shitty thing to do to you, and I hope you know that I'm really sorry, and would do anything to make it up to you."

My guess is she'll forgive him in the next few months. Yes, he'll need to avoid further screw-ups, but a good marriage should be able to survive a thoughtless mistake like this.

Posted by EricaP on February 28, 2012 at 8:01 PM · Report

14

Am I the only one who has ever had sex when I totally didn't intend to? Fucking is a primitive instinct and when you are turned on it's pretty damn difficult to not do it. I don't see it as a betrayal decision entirely. Every single animal will risk its life to have sex, and we are no different. I think the guy was caught up in the moment and forgot all about the 'rule' especially since she didn't forbid it, she said she was 'uncomfortable' with it. I hope they can get past this. I hardly ever disagree with Dan, but this time I think he overreacted.

Posted by MsJagger on February 28, 2012 at 8:03 PM · Report

15

heartbroken doesn't ask for advice, she asks if she's wrong to feel hurt. Dan answered that. Sometimes people just need their feelings validated a little bit and they'll work things out themselves now that they've been given that confidence-booster

Posted by tal on February 28, 2012 at 8:13 PM · Report

16

Man forget sex, this shit isn't even worth it. Risking weeks/months/years of emotional torture for a few minutes of potential pleasure that's never anywhere near as good in reality as you imagine it will be? You might as well just shoot yourself when you're done because you've just purchased yourself a one-way ticket to a world of shit and there are no refunds.

Posted by Hurf Blurfman on February 28, 2012 at 8:18 PM · Report

17

Ms Erica - The answer is simple. The next threesome, if there is one, will have the husband bound, gagged and doing nothing but watching as the third (an M this time, though he is told beforehand it will be an F) gives his wife a better time than he can. I recommend a professional, paid from the husband's wallet.

You may note what a benign mood I'm in. If I were in a naughty mood, I'd suggest that the third, after satisfying the wife, pretend to turn his attentions to the husband. No prize for guessing what I'd suggest if I were in a nasty mood.

The apology you want for her is a reasonable one, but I don't hold the chance of her getting it as high, as the sort of person capable of it wouldn't cross the only line drawn in the first place. Maybe he'll read this column, recognize himself, and do something Japanese.

Posted by vennominon on February 28, 2012 at 8:27 PM · Report

18

@ 6, 13, & 14:
I don't want to tell someone to leave her marriage or anything (I think Sloggers often default to a DTMFA too quickly, and I'm of the opinion that there aren't always so many other, better fish in the sea), but I'm with Dan and Crinoline here. Heartbroken was pretty damn GGG and her selfish husband couldn't respect her limits. She says explicitly that her reasons for having the threesome were to please him--and she doesn't mention having had any interest whatsoever in a threesome for her own sake. She also says that she was reluctant to intrude on her husband's good time, not that she was more turned on than she anticipated being.

He strikes me as being incredibly selfish, and I find myself wondering how this selfishness plays itself out in other areas.

If she is heartbroken and he apologizes by saying "hey, so sorry; I got carried away and did what I really wanted to do even though I knew you didn't want me to do it," that doesn't seem like much of an apology to me. He's like a kid who got caught breaking a rule and isn't sorry for the behavior, but is very, very sorry he got caught. If this is the kind of apology that is offered, the only lesson he will have learned is that he can do absolutely anything he wants regardless of how he knows she feels about it, and if he apologizes afterward, he'll be forgiven. It's the old "better to ask for forgiveness than permission" routine, and I think it reinforces bad behavior.

It seems to me that there should be consequences.

Posted by nocutename on February 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM · Report

19

Dan's repsonse to LW1's spouse was harsh, but well-deerved and well-earned. He blew it, big time. Look for LW1 to write another letter in about a year in which she ponders ending the marriage.

Posted by Robin8

on February 28, 2012 at 8:32 PM · Report

20

Well I wasn't first to post after all...but thanks @6!

And @14, yeah it's a primitive instinct, but we aren't just a bunch of hormones and chemicals acting in a socio-cultural, inter-personal vacuum; society would be a whole lot crappier/non-existent otherwise. There's a whole lot more to sex drive than that - learning, experience, socio-cultural norms etc.
Yes most of us have probably fucked when we didn't necessarily consciously intend to. Sub consciously we probably did or at least some little part of our brain knew what we really wanted to do; fuck. You can choose to be self-aware or not. And when we have an agreement with a loved one, we should def choose to be self aware.
I don't buy in to that whole uncontrollable urge BS. It's the same old tired excuse used by sex offenders and their defence lawyers. Moreover, anybody who has had their parent/s walk in on them as a teenager, when in the middle of or about to fuck a partner, will tell you it is most definitely NOT impossible to control sexual urges when it really matters.

Posted by SexEd on February 28, 2012 at 8:35 PM · Report

21

@Mr. Ven: I like your suggestion.

@EricaP: In so many ways I admire you, but what has worked for you and your dynamic with your husband doesn't necessarily work for everyone.
You are particularly GGG, and you and your husband, whom you've described as your dom (which might play a part in your acceptance of his behavior) have been together a long time, and have kids--all these are reasons--perhaps--to consider more forgiveness.

We don't know how long Heartbroken and her husband have been together, what the dynamic of their marriage is, whether or not they have children, etc.

But I will say that you have alluded to being upset by the discovery of your husband's repeated and seemingly unnecessary lies, discovered after you rallied after the discovery of his infidelity after which you seemed to have remade yourself from monogamous wife into super-slut, mostly to satisfy a man who seems insufficiently grateful. You recently answered someone's question about your preference saying that if you were married to someone else you would hope for monogamy, from which I conclude that you have made and are continuing to make a lot of sacrifices for your husband who doesn't even pay you the courtesy of being honest about his resumption of smoking. Forgive me if I say that I think you sell yourself short, and that is your right to do. But it kind of stings to see you trying to cast Heartbroken's experiences in a more positive light so that she can take a leaf from your book.

I'm sorry if I offended you, but I guess I'm in a less benign mood than Mr. Vennominon is.

Posted by nocutename on February 28, 2012 at 8:45 PM · Report

22

Dear SLASH,

EPIC FAIL. Seriously. Let me count the ways.

First, and most importantly, you fail as an ethical human being. It's not okay to try to trick your sex partner into doing things that s/he has already told you s/he isn't comfortable doing. Period, full stop, end of story, no discussion.

Less importantly, but still worth mentioning, you fail as a member of the slash community. (Granted, the term "slash community" implies a degree of shared identity and central organization that doesn't actually exist; "slash communities" or "slash network" might be more appropriate. But you know what I'm talking about.) My personal philosophy is that fandom is like Fight Club: you don't fucking talk about it. But if you are going to talk about fandom -- in a nationally syndicated column, no less -- then please, please, for the love of Kirk/Spock, don't imply some sort of causal relationship between your fannish activities and your casual disregard for other people's sexual boundaries. ("I write slash, therefore I am compelled to trick my unwilling husband into acting out my fantasies in real life!") Obviously I can't speak for anybody but myself, but I'd bet good money that if I took a poll and worked out the percentage of slash fans who were happy to have their hobby publicly associated with your delusional, amoral asshattery, I'd wind up with a number starting with a decimal point and a couple of zeros.

Posted by echizen_kurage on February 28, 2012 at 9:32 PM · Report

23

Dan needs to write a book of 21st Century Sexual Etiquette. And if you do, Dan, would you kindly include the following: If there's something particular you'd like to your partner to wear--heels, clamps, mum's rubber apron, whatever-- it's perfectly acceptable to ask he/she wear it/them. If, however, your partner does not already posses these items, *YOU* freaking pay for them!

Posted by CostumeDrama on February 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM · Report

24

i am enchanted by the idea of "favorite tit clamps." "Hon, let's just use the everyday tit clamps tonight. We'll break out my favorite tit clamps when company's coming."

jill
http://inbedwithmarriedwomen.blogspot.co…

Posted by inbed

on February 28, 2012 at 9:37 PM · Report

25

Heh. Never mind that most yaoi (form of slashfic) is written by women for women.

Posted by DRF on February 28, 2012 at 9:39 PM · Report

26

I always thought I'd be open to a threesome until I read that first letter. It makes my stomach turn... what a nightmare betrayal. I don't think there is any way I could sit quietly so as not to disturb and not freak the fuck out if that happened to me. That stupid motherfucking husband deserves exactly what #17 describes. Either or. Fuck you POS husband. You NEVER deserved to have a threesome. If I was the LW I would have a hard time not questioning POS husband's fidelity after some shit like that.

Posted by bodhirungus on February 28, 2012 at 9:43 PM · Report

27

Great column this week. Heartbroken asked if it was wrong for her to still feel hurt, and I think Dan's answer makes it quite clear that she's not wrong, even though it's directed at her husband.

"Every single animal will risk its life to have sex, and we are no different." Every kind of animal might, but not every animal, thanks!

Posted by Suzy on February 28, 2012 at 9:45 PM · Report

28

Happy Extra Day! (I'm on the East coast, so it's the 29th already).

Dan hit it out of the park with this column. I lurve so much that articulate and righteous indignation pointed at people who truly truly deserve it. If I were in Heartbroken's shoes, man, I would be so done.

And Slash's husband is married to an asshole. Wow. Don't do it Slash.

I'm a little curious what the question was: "What's the best strategy for getting my husband—" to what?

"What's the best strategy for getting my husband on board?"

or

"What's the best strategy for getting my husband drugged properly so that my friend can fuck him and he won't fight back. Oh, and it would help if he didn't remember very much either. That would be hot, knowwhatImean?" (I imagine she's a pretty bad person).

Posted by Sandiai on February 28, 2012 at 10:05 PM · Report

29

Also, love the Joe Newton cartoon. "Don't,um, don't fuck the cheese Brown Mouse, that was part of the deal."

Posted by Sandiai on February 28, 2012 at 10:12 PM · Report

30

The first letter scared the hell out of me. I'm on the fence about a threesome, and the possibility of fuck ups like that (and the horrible heartbreak that follows) is what keeps me on the fence. Assholes like that guy are the reason more women are up here on the fence with me.

Posted by wxPDX on February 28, 2012 at 10:21 PM · Report

31

I'm a little surprised to hear Dan "monogamy is unnatural" Savage say that Heartbroken's husband needs a third party's consent to fuck anybody else. I thought the solution would be to tell wifey that if he's good most of the time, that should count for something.

WYICCUW and SLASH need to remember one thing. Rape is an act of violence and power by The Patriarchy. Women are entirely without power and privilege. Ergo, women cannot rape, and neither should act like that's something to worry about.

Posted by ChiTodd on February 28, 2012 at 10:51 PM · Report

32

WYICCUW's letter has prompted me to tell a cautionary tale. A caution against revealing your kinks too soon, or sharing your traumas too late with your partner. I very, very, VERY fortunately avoided a misstep that probably would have ruined the wonderful relationship I'm in with a wonderful GGG guy, I'll call M.

I'm a straight woman and shy about revealing I have a rape fantasy. Very few people understand it; most people think it's disgusting. I have only ever mentioned it once - to a FWB, and only after he first mentioned he had the same fantasy - and had it thrillingly fulfilled. I had been in a relationship with M for 7 months when I finally decided I would broach it with him. Before I could find the right time and work up the balls to actually do it, he revealed a very painful part of his past. That his sister had been raped and murdered when she was 12. Boy, did I dodge a bullet. I know, now, I cannot EVER bring this up with him, because there is no way he would consider it, and, worse, would probably be repelled by it - and by me, for harbouring it. Our sex life is great, and I can live without having this particular kink of mine fulfilled ever again. There are far, FAR more important things. I don't remember what Dan's advice was on the time-frame for revealing your kinks, but I am so, SO glad I waited so long.

Posted by iywiy on February 28, 2012 at 11:28 PM · Report

33

WYICCUW's letter has prompted me to tell a cautionary tale. A caution against revealing your kinks too soon, or sharing your traumas too late with your partner. I very, very, VERY fortunately avoided a misstep that probably would have ruined the wonderful relationship I'm in with a wonderful GGG guy, I'll call M.

I'm a straight woman and shy about revealing I have a rape fantasy. Very few people understand it; most people think it's disgusting. I have only ever mentioned it once - to a FWB, and only after he first mentioned he had the same fantasy - and had it thrillingly fulfilled. I had been in a relationship with M for 7 months when I finally decided I would broach it with him. Before I could find the right time and work up the balls to actually do it, he revealed a very painful part of his past. That his sister had been raped and murdered when she was 12. Boy, did I dodge a bullet. I know, now, I cannot EVER bring this up with him, because there is no way he would consider it, and, worse, would probably be repelled by it - and by me, for harbouring it. Our sex life is great, and I can live without having this particular kink of mine fulfilled ever again. There are far, FAR more important things. I don't remember what Dan's advice was on the time-frame for revealing your kinks, but I am so, SO glad I waited so long.

Posted by iywiy on February 28, 2012 at 11:31 PM · Report

34

@Msjagger,

You're right, we are animals and sometimes fucking is unintentional. Sometimes that's the best kind of fucking.

What makes it the worst kind, is when it doesn't come with someone else's fucking permission.

Heartbroken's husband violated her during a sexual experience. He hurt her through a sexual act. That's pretty low.

I mean, if you set the boundary with a guy not to stick his finger in your arse during sex and then he did. You'd feel violated, maybe not by the act, but by the implicit trust agreement we have with anyone we get naked and sexual with that they won't hurt us (unless we like that).

Posted by Imperfekto on February 29, 2012 at 1:55 AM · Report

35

@Msjagger,

You're right, we are animals and sometimes fucking is unintentional. Sometimes that's the best kind of fucking.

What makes it the worst kind, is when it doesn't come with someone else's fucking permission.

Heartbroken's husband violated her during a sexual experience. He hurt her through a sexual act. That's pretty low.

I mean, if you set the boundary with a guy not to stick his finger in your arse during sex and then he did. You'd feel violated, maybe not by the act, but by the implicit trust agreement we have with anyone we get naked and sexual with that they won't hurt us (unless we like that).

Posted by Imperfekto on February 29, 2012 at 1:57 AM · Report

36

@ChiTodd:

WYICCUW and SLASH need to remember one thing. Rape is an act of violence and power by The Patriarchy. Women are entirely without power and privilege. Ergo, women cannot rape, and neither should act like that's something to worry about.

You do realize that this is not actually Standard Feminist Doctrine™, right? Yes, Dworkin, MacKinnon, and Brownmiller -- the beloved strawwomen of anti-feminist reactionaries -- all operate on the assumption that only men can be rapists, but they are speaking for and from a strange and distant fringe. I'm not going to play the No True Scotswoman card and claim that Brownmiller et al. aren't "real" feminists, but they sure as heck don't speak for all feminists.

Needless to say, I don't speak for all feminists either. Nonetheless, I am fairly confident that a substantial majority of self-identified feminists would take it as self-evident that women can and do commit rape, albeit less frequently than men do. (Here, the legalistically-minded might be inclined to quibble about terminology, but let's assume for our purposes that "rape" simply means "to engage in sex with a non-consenting party," and try to avoid any semantic grandstanding over what constitutes "sex.") If any actual feminists -- as opposed to feminist-baiting trolls -- would like to prove me wrong and seriously argue that women are categorically incapable of committing sexual violence, please feel free to do so . . . but I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by echizen_kurage on February 29, 2012 at 2:02 AM · Report

37

I can understand the idea that one can find oneself in an unexpected (sexual) situation, a situation one had not agreed to beforehand, and end up liking it. I.e., SLASH might conceivably get her husband to like having sex with the second guy in her threesome. And Heartbroken might conceivably have (surprisingly) enjoyed the very thing she had ruled out.

It's possible. But then again, seriously: what are the odds?

If the conclusion you drew from your negotiations with your partner(s) about what it is you're going to do in your next adventure time is that you need to pull a surprise twist in the agreed-upon rules on the remote chance that it will all work out for the best -- that there are easy ways of convincing people they like something they say they don't like without their cooperation... Then you're simply setting yourself up for trouble.

I'm sorry, but I have to agree that the only honorable path to changing other people's tastes is actively involving them in the process, with their consent (usually via being GGG). And even in this case, it often doesn't work (just like your own tastes, for that matter, don't change appreciably just because your partner wishes they would).

But if it works... as Dan pointed out... then you have a much better situation.

To Heartbroken, I would simply say: yes, Dan is right, it's OK for you to feel heartbroken and to express these feelings to your husband. He does indeed owe you at least a heartfelt apology. All in all, maybe he was just, as it were, overcome by his hormones in the heat of the moment; or maybe, like SLASH, he thought you would be overcome by yours and change your mind; but either way he took a risk that he didn't have the right to take. Being an unrepenting optimist, I hope you'll forgive him and you guys will go on to a better understanding of each other's limits, and that your husband will understand how important respect is (it fosters trust, and in sex, as in so many other things, trust is an invaluable plus).

To SLASH, I would say: no matter how alluring the fantasy that you could "make someone like" what they don't like (because, who knows, maybe they're lying to themselves, we're all perverse polymorphs, kinksters sans frontières, we just need some "encouragement" to "let go") as if life were one endless Tinto Brass or Emmanuelle movie... No. People are more complicated than that. I won't say it never works. But the odds are veeerry much against you; you'll probably end up just like Heartbroken's husband: having, in the best-case scenario, to give a heartfelt apology.

More...

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 4:37 AM · Report

38

14- MsJagger-- Yes, I have gone ahead with PIV sex when I hadn't entirely decided that's what I was going to do earlier. I was in my 20s and thought it would be best for the relationship if I waited, then got turned on in the heat of the moment and decided to go ahead. For me, PIV sex was the most intimate, a threshold to cross.

I think you're right when you say that fucking is a primitive instinct. For that reason, I quickly learned that if I thought it would be best to hold off, I didn't put myself in that situation in the first place. I didn't get naked with the guy.

Apply this to Heartbroken's husband's situation. If his explanation to his wife is that he's really sorry, he didn't mean to, that he just got turned on and carried away because fucking is a primitive instinct, then her reasonable response should be that she understands and won't put him in that situation where he can't control himself again. i.e. no more threesomes. We're back to Dan's advice where we started.

Posted by Crinoline on February 29, 2012 at 4:45 AM · Report

39

@36(echizen_kurage), I've often compared this kind of troll, whose irony is based on some degree of belief in an evil feminist conspiracy to enslave men, to the religious fundamentalists who think there's a war on Christmas, or who worry Obama is about to turn America into a Muslim country.

The sad thing is that there are points to be made -- there are, I'm sorry to say, feminists who would deny that women could ever commit sexual violence (unless they were led to it by men or The Patriarchy); I've met some on the internet. There are mysandric opinions out there, as well as naive perceptions of how social processes work and who's to blame. There are people with a girls-vs.-boys, war-of-the-sexes mentality.

But instead of actually trying to contribute intelligently to a discussion on feminism with real points and arguments, they prefer not to acknowledge the overwhelmingly majority of reasonable people who identify with feminism that you mentioned and go off on a tangent about some parallel dystopian universe, mimicking the very behavior they purport to criticize.

They consciously decide not to respect their opponent's common humanity and intelligence. They consciously decide to resort to exaggeration and overgeneralization and facile assumptions, even when they aren't really necessary because there might be good points to be made. In so doing, they forfeit their right to be similarly respected. Just like their own worst enemies.

As in so many other things, this spectrum is a circle, and the extremes meet.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 4:48 AM · Report

40

I've always taken issue with the term "bisexual experience"

someone having a sexual experience with a person of the same gender, though they may BE bisexual, are have a homosexual experience.

Posted by Doot on February 29, 2012 at 4:51 AM · Report

41

@14(MsJagger), I was basically going to say what Crinoline above said, with which I agree entirely. Or, to put it in my personal style: it's true that we often are carried away by the situation and do unplanned things in the sexual realm. Which is why what counts is what happens before this situation. Hubby at best thought he would be able to control himself and follow the agreed-upon rule with his wife; well, he didn't. Now she would be certainly within her rights to, as Crinoline above notes, say she doesn't want to put him in this situation of being unable to control himself again, i.e. no more threesomes. Unless he can convince her that he won't agree to something and then fail to respect it again.

It's the same rule for all kinds of agreements between people, isn't it? If he thinks he can't do it, that it's impossible for him, then ultimately he should leave her and find someone else who would give him the kind of agreement he needs to live sanely. But if he wants to stay with her, he has to negotiate with her. Just as she has to negotiate with him in order to stay with him.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 4:56 AM · Report

42

SLASH,

I have fantasies of ramming cars that cut me off and glitter bombing Santorum, and they will never happen because of the serious consequences resulting from carrying them out. Unfortunately you are playing with exactly that kind of circumstance. If you want to surprise your husband, have the partner serenade him, offer to do a full body massage (without sex), or ask him to read your slash interactively with your husband. Just don't cross the line of hurting your husband, and your relationship, unless this is a particularly cruel way of making him divorce you. You may be running your husband's tolerance for your sake into the land of "Fuck Off!".

Heartbroken's husband is a classic case of being careful for what you wish for. It is time for her to remind her husband of just how much he could lose if she decides to forgive him.

@31 Chitodd,

Your latter statement is so full of shit, I don't want to touch it, except: "Women are entirely without power and privilege". If that statement is anything like the "real world", then where I live is even more remove from the common plane of existence than I thought.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on February 29, 2012 at 5:12 AM · Report

43

Wow. It's amazing (and sad) that these folks would be so mean to someone they supposedly love.

Well done as usual, Dan.

Posted by samanthaf63 on February 29, 2012 at 5:37 AM · Report

44

@42,

how much he could lose even if she decides to forgive him.

Posted by Married in MA on February 29, 2012 at 5:37 AM · Report

45

@42,

What I meant about Heartbroken's husband, and his wish, has more to do with the "Law of Unintended Consequence". He proved just how little she should trust him.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on February 29, 2012 at 5:52 AM · Report

46

I know that Dan may have access to more details than we do, but the printed version of Heartbroken's letter gives me a lot of sympathy for her husband. Heartbroken comes across as a passive-aggressive martyr. She lays out an ambiguous ground rule ("I said I was uncomfortable," not "we agreed we wouldn't"), then when it's violated in the heat of the moment she acts as though she's OK with it, but afterward she's not merely upset or angry but heartbroken. If vaginal intercourse is really that big a deal to her, how could she not object while it was happening?

It sounds to me like she wants to restrict her husband's behavior (which is perfectly reasonable in this context), but doesn't want to accept responsibility for the restriction (which is not). She needs to own up to not being as GGG as she likes to think she is.

All that being said, everything Dan said to the husband was dead-on. A wife who will agree to a threesome is rare treasure, and a husband should do everything he can to accommodate such a wife's wishes.

Posted by goshawk on February 29, 2012 at 6:32 AM · Report

47

I agree with ven(17)/cute(21) re: Erica.

The situation in LW1 is basically my worst nightmare. Not that I'd do a threeway in any case, but still. God, awful. What a douche. And sorry, Erica, but the idea that someone's relationship is not 'good' or 'strong' if they can't 'survive' that. That makes me very uncomfrotable - I mean, it's essentially blaming the wife for not putting up with enough from her man. "He only beat the shit out of you once, Cheryl, a good marriage should be able to survive that." Personally, I'd rather the trip to the emergency room over her scenario and it's a less embarassing DTMFA.

Posted by mydriasis on February 29, 2012 at 7:14 AM · Report

48

46- goshawk-- A lot depends on how we interpret these 2 statements in Heartbroken's letter:

1. "I laid out my ground rules."
2. "I said I was uncomfortable."

When I read it, I thought the ground rules were pretty clear. Clear to us the reading audience and clear to the husband who understood that those were the rules.

But you and others (14-MsJagger) have zeroed in on the possibility that she didn't make the ground rules clear and all she did was voice a vague discomfort with the idea of PIV sex. If that is indeed the case, then Heartbroken's husband does have a defense.

Posted by Crinoline on February 29, 2012 at 7:19 AM · Report

49

20) SexEd: Thank you for that. My mind reeled reading # 14. Yes, I’m sure we’ve all ended up having sex that wasn’t premeditated (or the best idea), but we’re still responsible for it. Excellent point with the sex offender excuse. Own what you do, people. If you want to be treated and respected as more than an animalistic drive, then you have to own your actions as a thinking human (and of course you are humans, and humans are prone to making mistakes which is why apologies were invented).

Posted by cougar.in.training on February 29, 2012 at 7:23 AM · Report

50

@47, that's too far: "He only beat the shit out of you once, Cheryl, a good marriage should be able to survive that."

Dan says (approximately) that a marriage is a bunch of apologies given and accepted, interspersed with some orgasms.

For grownups who agreed to be in a threesome, this is not the End of The World. It's a betrayal, but not like "beating the shit out of her."

Give me a break. Or don't.

Whatever.

You all have great relationships, with never anything to apologize for beyond leaving the butter out. Fan-fucking-tastic.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 8:12 AM · Report

51

I think I go along w/#14. While I don't exactly disagree with Dan's harsh comments about Heartbroken's husband, there's a part of me that thinks well, what did you expect when you consented to this? Laying out ground rules beforehand doesn't exactly hold a lot of reliability when it comes time to the actual sexual experience. Plus, it's OK for him to put his dick in a woman's mouth but not her vagina? I'm sure Bill Clinton would think so, but in either case, he's getting sexual excitement with another woman, but one of them is OK w/you and the other is not??

It seems to me if you don't want your husband to enjoy sexual activity w/another woman, don't be conceding to a threesome in the first place. That was stupid, and she needs to take some responsibility for this feeling of heartache.

Posted by wayne on February 29, 2012 at 8:22 AM · Report

52

Heartbroken might want to temper her heartbreak a bit by realizing that this was their first attempt at what was probably a lifelong, intense fantasy of her husband. Yes, he failed at it. But just as Dan points out that the rules may relax with experience, so may the ability and self-control of the participants increase with experience. You're married. Don't quit on each other after one try.

To others who may deny the validity of "I was caught up in the moment" I would say that not only is that statement factually correct but also it's a bit of an understatement. That was one hell of a moment in the guy's life. He made one hell of mess of it, but still. Let him apologize and then figure out how to proceed. Sometimes it seems like we condemn people for failing to do something, yet if they had done it we would have called them heroic. Is there nothing between "total asshole" and "heroic self-control out of the gate"?

@SLASH
Worst fucking idea I've seen in all my years of reading SL.

Posted by Mr. J on February 29, 2012 at 8:25 AM · Report

53

@ 51 - No, she doesn't need to "take some responsibility". She agreed to the threesome only if he would obey that groundrule. He didn't. YOUR feelings about the validity of that groundrule are totally irrelevent, since you're not part of that marriage.

Your argument is totally self-serving and is akin to saying "I don't agree with this law, so it's OK if I break it. What did they expect when they adopted such a silly law?" Well, you'll still go to prison if you get caught.

Posted by Ricardo on February 29, 2012 at 8:34 AM · Report

54

@52:

Worst fucking idea I've seen in all my years of reading SL.

A year or so ago, there was a letter from a pedophile who was considering babysitting for his friends -- I think that one takes the prize for "worst fucking idea." Still, SLASH definitely deserves an honorable mention.

Posted by echizen_kurage on February 29, 2012 at 8:49 AM · Report

55

@17, if your proposal is meant non-consensually, that would certainly be the end of the marriage. Plus, you know, criminal charges of false imprisonment, theft, and assault (if you were in a 'naughty mood.') She'd be better off just calling a divorce attorney if she's as vindictive as you propose.

@18 Of course there are natural consequences. She doesn't trust him for a while. She's less GGG. But are you imagining punitive consequences, on the order of having to write 1000 times "I won't put my P in another woman's V"? Or being grounded from going out bowling with the guys for three weeks? What consequences do you think would be appropriate in this case?

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 8:59 AM · Report

56

After 3 years of being GGG and open to my husband's fantasies, I'm over it. We were listed on a swinger's site, attended parties and met several couples. He picks them, I am always disappointed. After "another" fun weekend where he promised me that I wouldn't be "taking one for the team" I was left alone in bed while he enjoyed himself "elsewhere" till 4:30 in the morning. He came back to the hotel room smelling like pussy and promptly passed out. I was left feeling betrayed and pissed off for the remainder of the night. I'm still upset. NOT that he slept with another woman (he's done that before) NOT that he was alone (he's done that before too) I am mad because I was alone waiting in a room for my husband to decide he was done having his fun. I'm "all out." Yes, another person who could care less about the arrangements we made before we started this adventure.

Posted by PsyQuestor on February 29, 2012 at 8:59 AM · Report

57

@51, Well, miss, what did you expect when you went to Mike Tyson's hotel room?

Posted by clashfan on February 29, 2012 at 9:07 AM · Report

58

You know what's weird about the letter? No mention of condoms. I guess it's possible he had put on a condom for the other woman's blow-job before transitioning to (illicit) fucking. Still seems weird to me that she doesn't mention it. If the guy fucked the third without a condom, that's a whole other level of fuck-up right there.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 9:11 AM · Report

59

@EricaP (50): A-fucking-men. So the guy acted like a stupid motherfucker. If you think you haven't at some point, then you are probably delusional or just live such a boring life that you never got the opportunity. Relationships are about the consistent behaviors and our willingness to apologize and adjust our behavior when we screw up.

Let's not forget that people often deceive themselves well before they get to the "betray-your-spouse" part. I'd wager that SLASH has all sorts of rationalizations that are mostly based on confusing fantasy with reality and I'm sure Heartbroken's husband had filled his head with all sorts of bullshit before he went PIV.

Posted by smajor82 on February 29, 2012 at 9:11 AM · Report

60

PsyQuestor@56, that sucks, I'm so sorry.

When was the last time the two of you worked to fulfill one of your personal fantasies? If your husband's not being GGG and keeping you very happy (and this goes for the LW too), then you do really need to stop and think about the big picture.

(For the record, nocute@21, my kink fantasies are currently getting fulfilled about ten times as often as my husband's extracurricular sex fantasies, so no need to worry about me.)

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 9:21 AM · Report

61

@5 - I lurvs your avatar...as much as Lilliable and cougar.in.training. Welcome!

@32,33 - I'd only add that you probably shouldn't post it here either, not if you want to really keep it to yourself. Someone else was posting a good bit here a little over a year ago about their relationship and kinks; their partner found the postings and it didn't end well.

I do certainly agree with you - if you can honestly live without your kinks - then it's fine not to share them too early. I think the general rule might be something like, "the more significant the issue, the sooner you share it". Fantasies you can live without and forget aren't very significant.

Posted by AFinch on February 29, 2012 at 9:28 AM · Report

62

Seems like Heartbroken's husband suffered from first time threesome excitement and pulled a noob move. It could also be indicative of general communication problems between the two of them. Or he could just be an abusive dick though really, we don't know.

I speak from experience. I've had a fair amount of threesomes in the past and made mistakes including violating boundaries in the heat of the moment. Since then I've learned that clear communication and a firm set of rules beforehand are critical. Even in a spontaneous encounter it's better to err on the side of caution.

Now, with my wife I follow her rules every time. I am just so grateful she's down to get freaky with another women. I realize she's being incredibly courageous and trusting. The very least I can do is not fuck that up. This is a lesson that Heartbroken's husband hasn't learned. He screwed up long term gain for short term pleasure and more importantly hurt his wife.

It could be Heartbroken's husband could redeem himself but it's up to her to tell him exactly how he fucked up. It sounds like she's suffering but not telling him what he did. If she wants to get over her hurt she needs to open up.

Rereading this, it sounds like I'm Team Dumbass Husband but I only have her side to go on. Maybe he's realized his mistake and apologized profusely. Maybe he hasn't. Who knows?

Posted by Hybrid Vigor on February 29, 2012 at 9:28 AM · Report

63

@36 - I'm sorry, but MacKinnon is not just a straw-woman, she's a flaming nutbag and kind of evil. I'm not anti-feminist in the least but she can't be dismissed as simply a cartoon caricature. She gets a frightening amount of traction.

Posted by AFinch on February 29, 2012 at 9:37 AM · Report

64

"Heartbroken" should investigate her husband. He's probably had affairs and will have more. He thinks it's just a "guy thing." Has he even apologized one time for what he did? Beware!

Posted by marilynsue on February 29, 2012 at 9:39 AM · Report

65

I almost don't want to go here since we've already got at least one anti-feminist troll but...
Hasn't Dan offered "strategies" to get reluctant wives and girlfriends to do threesomes/anal/whatever in the past?
Only not okay to do to a guy?
Of course her current plan is horrible bullshit but that's why she needs advice on a better strategy!

Posted by chi_type on February 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM · Report

66

EricaP is very defensive, I wonder why.

Posted by pastaefagoli on February 29, 2012 at 11:20 AM · Report

67

@66
Not so. This is a conversation about complicated issues between adults, some of whom find it difficult to understand EricaP's choices. She's reminding them of some important facts. Here's another shock for you: she probably hasn't told you everything.

Posted by Mr. J on February 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM · Report

68

Love letter #1, and I really hope she shows his response to her husband. How Dan Savage helps my vanilla marriage http://sexlivesofmoms.wordpress.com/2012…

Posted by Sex Lives Of Moms on February 29, 2012 at 11:41 AM · Report

69

@67:

Re: "For grownups who agreed to be in a threesome, this is not the End of The World. It's a betrayal, but not like "beating the shit out of her."

Give me a break. Or don't.

Whatever.

You all have great relationships, with never anything to apologize for beyond leaving the butter out. Fan-fucking-tastic."

That is being defensive in response to some posters who expressed concern for her emotional well-being. I mostly just lurk, but I have to agree with the sentiments expressed by ncn and others. Also I believe that EricaP's advice does not suit most people well in most situations. And, she seems unhappy. I know that this assertion will be met with a level of protest from EricaP in a tone which would lead me to believe I'm right, I mean, just look at the response I quoted and her "don't worry" up above.

Posted by pastaefagoli on February 29, 2012 at 11:43 AM · Report

70

@69
Okay, I won't.

Posted by Mr. J on February 29, 2012 at 11:52 AM · Report

71

@69, I'll admit it's annoying to have people on the internet insist I'm unhappy. But I know that I set the stage by admitting to having difficulties adjusting to my husband's midlife crisis. Now that I'm posting less about my personal life, people have a natural tendency to remember the worst bits and assume that sums up my marriage. Do you think that the LW's husband (or mine) is as blameworthy as someone who beats the shit out of his wife (nonconsensually), per mydriasis@47? If so, then we disagree.

Although, note @58 where I raise the issue of condoms and excoriate the husband if he went ahead without one, and @60, where I note that if the LW's husband wants her to fulfill his fantasies but ignores hers, then that's a big concern, to me.

@70 (FYI, pastaefagoli's "Give me a break. Or don't" was quoting me...)

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 12:02 PM · Report

72

One of the problems I have with the "loss of self control" arguement is that I'm not entirely sure it would be validated to the degree that it has been if it had been a MMF and heartbroken was the husband instead of the wife. Not because I think anyone here is sextist against women, but just cause it seems some expect this sort of behavior from men, which sells men like #62 short.

As for EricaP, she's an adult and whatever she's going is her right. Her giving advice isn't dooming anyone. Plus whenever someone gets advice or listens to an opinion they owe it to themselves to take the source into serious consideration.

Still, I've been with the "Bad Boys" aka awesome people with less than stellar relationship skills. When they hurt you, you can't expect sympathy or kindness from those around you. In fact, I've had to shrug, smile, and change the subject on more than one occassion as a longtime friend outright insulted and sneered at me in a moment of vulnerability.

Posted by mygash on February 29, 2012 at 12:11 PM · Report

73

My husband totally blew his chances of ever having a threesome (even though I am bi, more than GGG, and would love to have one) by telling me point blank he wouldn't consider it "worth it" to even show up if he couldn't put his P in the third's V the first time we ever had one. Way to make it obvious that you don't give two shits about my feelings or boundaries, buddy. FAIL!

Posted by Ell on February 29, 2012 at 12:17 PM · Report

74

@ 71 - Some people seem to think that what you (impersonal you) post on the Internet gives an adequate picture of your entire life, feelings and desires. They just can't fathom that you can and would control the information you send out, or that you might post only when you need to vent about your problems.

As far as I can see, you seem to be pretty much in control of your situation, which doesn't mean that everything is perfect, as every adult who has had relationships should know.

In other words: keep commenting, Erica, it's always interesting to read what you have to say.

Changing subject: about the condoms, the LW most probably did not mention it because it had nothing to do with her problem, and because her otherwise insensitive husband did keep his word as far as condom use is concerned.

Posted by Ricardo on February 29, 2012 at 12:27 PM · Report

75

@74, it's just that if he stopped long enough to put on a condom, that undercuts the defense of "carried away in the moment" -- if you can remember the condom, you can remember to check with your wife (right there, next to you) if this is okay.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 12:33 PM · Report

76

(The people I know don't use condoms for oral, so that's my context...)

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 12:34 PM · Report

77

its kind of funny that a double standard of "acceptance" is misting out of these comments: a man can lost control of his impulses at the height of his passion and its okay, but no way should we make a man indulge in what his woman wants him to do, even if its gay sex. i say pooten-nanny poon-tang (for that special trans guy who left his family in nebraska to play sexual hipster on capitol hill-you know who you are)! can you imagine a future where sexuality is not based on a gender-biased guilt weapon dictacted by religious fiend-controllers but rather by pure attraction alone? i wouldn't necessarily say i'm gay (never had any type of contact like that) but the thought of cuddling with a magnum p.i. era tom selleck does make my stomach feel a little goey.....

Posted by rayray on February 29, 2012 at 12:38 PM · Report

78

@72 re self-control & women: I meant to stop with oral with a guy when I was 20, and again when I was 40 -- in those cases, I initiated intercourse despite having decided not to. You may be right that fewer Slogsters would admit that women can be made foolish by lust, but it certainly happens.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 12:39 PM · Report

79

@ 75 - Totally agree, but she's not the one who came up with the "lost in the moment" defense, sloggers did. And I personally think it's BS (trust me, I'm a guy, and I've had threesomes). And from the sound of it, I don't think she'd buy it.

She might have asked him to use condoms for oral. Or thay might never have used condoms at all and not even thought about it, based on the ridiculous but commonly-held idea that being straight prevents all STDs. At any rate, she doesn't see it as part of the problem.

Anyway, I think the story is enough of a mindfuck as it is that we don't need to look for further evidence of her husband's douchebaggery.

Posted by Ricardo on February 29, 2012 at 1:31 PM · Report

80

Ms Erica - Just for the record, I said nothing against you. I only addressed you with my suggestion because we seemed to be in the same conversation of how they could move forward. He needs to GET how he made her feel. As whatever apology he issued if any between the event and her writing to Mr Savage indicated nothing in that line, I advocated a sharp lesson.

Anyway, I wasn't being nearly so dramatic as all that. My plan was that she would get him to agree to be bound and gagged, on the understanding that another woman would then enter the room and play with both of them in turn. In fact, let's make this even better and just have her refer to a friend - in honour of the recently departed Mr Jones, I'll call him Gene. Hubby, thinking the threesome will involve Jean, agrees to it, is bound and gagged by wife, and then sees to his horror, when he cannot comment, that Jean is really Gene. Some of my posts are works in progress. I'm finding this increasingly satisfactory.

I shall await further instructions as to whether I am dismissed from court.

Posted by vennominon on February 29, 2012 at 1:41 PM · Report

81

@71 EricaP
Yeah, I caught that too late. I didn't follow up to correct because I thought the sentiment was clear in spite of the error.

Posted by Mr. J on February 29, 2012 at 1:44 PM · Report

82

@10 Professor,

An MFF threesome without contact between the women is a lot like trying to drive two cars across town at the same time. It can be done, but it's really exhausting.

Posted by Howlin' Jed on February 29, 2012 at 1:57 PM · Report

83

@79 agreed.

@80 - I wasn't referring to you @71, though I may have implicitly included you in my snippiness @50 - I apologize for any offense. Thanks for explaining that you meant the scene to be consensual.

Certainly, from the way she wants Dan to reassure her that she's entitled to feel hurt, it does sound like he's an unapologetic asshole.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM · Report

84

Mr J - Heroic self-control is Elinor Dashwood suffering through months of keeping the secret about Edward's engagement to Lucy even when Marianne chides her for being unfeeling on a regular basis. Heroic self-control is Captain Harville taking part in seeing to the portrait drawn for his late sister being prepared as a gift to Captain Benwick's new fiancee. If one believes (which I don't) that Mr Knightley is already in love when Emma when she and Mrs Weston finally mention the possibility of his attachment to Jane Fairfax, then Mr Knightley demonstrates a great deal of heroic self-control not to blackmail or murder Frank Churchill for most of the second half of the novel.

I'd ask if this is really the hill which you'd choose to die defending, but again, I am sufficiently ignorant of the ways of mixed sexes to acknowledge that I can speak with no real authority. But, if you insist that this really would have been "heroic self-control" on the part of the husband to avoid doing the one thing he wasn't supposed to do, then I shall adjust my views and expectations of men attracted to women accordingly, and use those adjusted views in future.

Really, I'd put his behaviour on a par with that of Violet Beauregarde.

Posted by vennominon on February 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM · Report

85

@55 Erica, @56 PsyQ,

If I ask the question of what makes it worthwhile to be in a relationship, I'm stuck with my own experiences to give examples of "value". The intangibles of trust and faith, hope and reliance are where I would start. If you (both) haven't got those in the relationship, then what kind of bond are you (both) sharing? I've learned that sexual exclusivity isn't necessarily a requirement, but only when trust is maintained. Even when monogamy is maintained, it is very easy to damage or destroy a partner's faith, and when the hope is gone, so is the relationship (in most meaningful ways).

I've been through a bad period over the past 5 years; to put it succinctly, I've had to kill the rageaholic that popped out of me after I had a breakdown. My wife's faith and hope in and for me kept us together. For me, seeing the pain (and worse, fear) on my wife's face is more than enough punishment. I at one point considered leaving to protect my family, not physically but certainly from stress. Conversely, winning a chance for my wife's ebullience is ever so precious. Building her trust, rewarding her hope, becoming reliable to myself and my family, all are intangibles of great value. Losing those things, in an adult relationship, should be consequence enough.

I can't stress enough just how difficult it is to understand appropriate responses to the stress, and wear and tear that beset us constantly, without resorting to the "preprogramming" of our upbringing. Without going through the difficulties in figuring out (at least) what we don't want from our family of origin, it shouldn't be surprising when history repeats itself. I have gained a lot of help in understanding and bettering myself by reading the examples and advice given through this blog.

Thanks!

Peace.

More...

Posted by Married in MA on February 29, 2012 at 2:13 PM · Report

86

@79 Opps! Didn't mean to say she was encouraging that arguement. I just was trying to join in on two conversations (loss of control & EricaP) in one comment square, cause I'm lazy like that.

She's arguing that this 3some mishap is an oversight that heartbroken can work through, which is true. Though, I have to say I'm less on board with the hurt party having to do all the emotional heavy lifting. I'm more with #80. But since things like that tend to vary so wildly couple to couple, just like who earns what & who does what, I'd go with forgiving gradually (not that all at once, you're GGG remember?/live and learn smuck) just cause I for one tend to need to get it all out even if it's just by myself, otherwise it just gets stored in my internal memory forever and pops up like a ringtone attached to a specific phone number.

Posted by mygash on February 29, 2012 at 2:17 PM · Report

87

SLASH,

Would you consider finding a gay couple that wouldn't mind your watching, while your husband services you?

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on February 29, 2012 at 2:22 PM · Report

88

@86 "She's arguing that this 3some mishap is an oversight that heartbroken can work through"

No. I was arguing that the guy made a serious mistake (not an oversight), which heartbroken could work through if she wanted to, and if he was apologetic. Now I'm arguing that he doesn't seem apologetic or GGG or respectful of her feelings. As you say, the hurt party can't do all the heavy lifting to save the relationship.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 2:25 PM · Report

89

Ms Erica - I'd have to be in something worse than a vicious mood to contemplate anything nonconsensual.

But I think I may go soon for the rest of the evening. I've been recalling my childhood as well as remembering a later occasion on which I was a bit undiplomatic in expressing my inability to tolerate (apologies in advance to any irate Canadians) Ms Murray's version of Daydream Believer.

Posted by vennominon on February 29, 2012 at 2:26 PM · Report

90

@Erica

It's not about how wonderful other people's relationships are or aren't, it's about honouring women (and men) who stand up for themselves and say "I deserve better than this". And not implying that that's wrong for them to do.

There are LOTS of mistakes people can make, and there are lots of mistakes people in my life have made that have hurt me a lot, whether they were family or friends or boyfriends. But there's a difference to me between the kinds of careless mistakes that all people make, and "mistakes" that people make (I don't think it was a mistake, I think he figured he'd see if he could get away with it) that are revelatory about one's character and therefore predictive of their future (and perhaps past) behaviour.

As Dan said, he put her in a nonconsensual sexual situation, he violated her and her trust.

You know what I find interesting? She doesn't make any mention of him apologizing in the letter. Perhaps Dan cut it out, but if he had apologized do you think Dan would be instructing him to apologize?

You're a grown woman and if you say you're happy in your relationship I take your word for it. (I mean that sincerely though the wording sounds sarcastic)

Where my concern happens is when it seems to me that you give the impression you think that the responsibility of keeping a marriage going rests soley on the wife's responsibility to forgive her husband for mistreating her - not on the husbands responsibility to treat her well in the first place (the ONLY pseudo-exception is your answers to men with low-libido wives). I'm sure that's not how you see it but that's the impressions your comments give me. Which is probably why I responded negatively.

Again, if it works for you in your (sub/dom) relationship, then that's fine. I'm a little on the submissive side myself - but only when I feel safe and cared for. I think most women prefer a more equal/respectful relationship than either you or myself.

More...

Posted by mydriasis on February 29, 2012 at 2:49 PM · Report

91

I'm a little surprised we haven't brought up the third's part in this. Not that it mitigates the husband's responsibility in any way, but the third surely was informed going into this that there would be no PIV. I'm not saying it's this woman's fault for allowing herself to be fucked, but I do think it's incredibly important to trust your third to also obey your ground rules. Obviously if she's not someone they know well, her betrayal is almost inconsequential, but as advice to future three-way-with-boundary-havers: make sure your third knows and agrees to your ground rules, and make sure you trust him/her.

Posted by magicdoyle on February 29, 2012 at 3:02 PM · Report

92

I guess I should add -- I say this because my first (and so far only) threesome was with my partner (he's male, I'm female) and a dear female friend of both of ours who he'd known growing up. We both trust her absolutely, and she and I conversed on the ground rules beforehand. Actually, each of us discussed ground rules as a twosome first, which helped because it meant that if there was a ground rule I had that I wasn't sure if he was aware of, I could discuss it with her first and make sure we were on the same page so that we could come together as a united front. All of us agreed not to do PIV sex. There was never any point at which I was afraid either of them would break this ground rule because of this very sound prior conversation series.

Posted by magicdoyle on February 29, 2012 at 3:06 PM · Report

93

@EricaP, and her critics, on the issue of forgiveness:

Forgiveness is indeed a virtue; and as another commenter noted, there should be some intermediate positions between the (clearly non-binary) opposition between "hero" and "asshole/douchebag".

I think we all agree he hurt her feelings, and this was wrong. Yes: he did something wrong, it hurt her; we all agree on that. The only question, I think, is whether or not he is "forgivable".

First of all, this is ultimately up to Heartbroken, who knows more about her husband than we do and is in a better position to evaluate how good or bad a person he has been to her, and to decide whether or not it's OK to forgive him. We can talk all we want about whether this one infraction is a biiig deal or not, but like so many other things in life, every person needs to know what is "too much" or "not enough" for him/herself.

Having said that... I tend to believe in forgiveness and redemption, precisely because of the reasons EricaP points out: none of us is perfect. Without knowing any of you all personally I am entirely sure that your relationships are not 100% perfect, that there are iffy and problematic aspects, that there were bad moments and that there still may be other bad moments in store in the future, even if you feel like you're living an idyll right now.

The capacity to look at another human being who, yes, has hurt you, has done something wrong, and still see (if indeed it is there) goodness, something worthy of forgiveness, is important in a marriage... in fact, in any kind of relationship. And not only because you (we) may be at the other end of this diad, in need of forgiveness for having screwed up. (Who hasn't been, among you? Really?)

Perhaps every one of us just periodically remember situations in which we hurt others just to remind ourselves that we're not saints either.

So yes, I agree with Dan that marriages (also, friendships, business partnerships, research projects, and so on) are a sequence of accepted apologies with good moments in-between (including orgasms, in the case of marriages). And so, unless what we don't know about Heartbroken's husband is indeed bad, I probably would forgive him.

But that's me. Heartbroken is a different person, and she has knowledge I don't have about her husband and herself. It's up to her.

More...

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 3:08 PM · Report

94

EricaP, as someone in a poly marriage, we use barriers for oral if they are in use for penetration. If the outside relationship is stable, they've been tested, and they use barriers with their other partners, we have gone barrier-free with a few other people.

Posted by clashfan on February 29, 2012 at 3:15 PM · Report

95

@EricaP, by the way, I hope you don't feel too bothered by so many people apparently wanting to prove your life is a failure. I had thought it was only Hunter79 who obsessed about your impending doom, but there seem to be others.

Is that just because you shared your doubts and difficulties? Strange. Maybe someday the same people will chastise me for being too interested in Latvian. Or Mr Ven for knowing too much about literature. Or Kim in Portland, and Married in MA, for being disturbingly good people. Or seandr and catballou for flirting. Or...

All in all, as Seinfeld would say, you're the mistress of your own domain. You're the one living your life; if others don't get your choices, well, too bad for them.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 3:19 PM · Report

96

@84 Mr. V
Yes, those are examples of fine heroism. Who among us humans wouldn't want to throttle Frank Churchill? I won't die defending my little hill but I will ask you to join me for coffee on a sunny terrace partway up from where Ms.Beauregarde resides. Perhaps I could demonstrate for you the dynamics of losing one's self in the sexual moment without regard for consequences (independent of gender pairing).

Posted by Mr. J on February 29, 2012 at 3:24 PM · Report

97

@mydriasis, running the risk of speaking for EricaP (who can certainly speak for herself without help), I'd say this is not what she tried to say. (At least, I don't think it would make sense, judging by the kinds of things she writes, that she would want to say what you're attributing to her.)

I don't think the point is condemning those who stand for themselves. I think the point is realizing we're all imperfect, and we all need forgiveness sometimes.

Note that this is some sort of yin-yang relationship (that little yin-yang symbol is quite meaningful). Standing for yourself and knowing when to leave; forgiving the errors of others and knowing when to stay; this is an art in which these two things are not in opposition -- you don't have to choose one OR the other. We should choose wisdom to see when we're dealing with a situation best solved by the former or by the latter solution.

I would never say that "the wife always has to do the forgiving." I don't think EricaP would either. We all forgive and are forgiven, depending on the situation. We forgive because we know we need forgiveness. As Giles said once in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, we don't seek forgiveness because we deserve it, we seek it because we need it. And this need humbles us.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 3:27 PM · Report

98

@91, actually that is an interesting point. I hadn't thought of that. I wonder what other people think about the guilt (or lack thereof) of the third partner, the other woman in the threesome: is she also guilty of rule breaking?

I suppose she is. Of course, she is less important to Heartbroken than her husband, since the two women didn't have any previous committed relationship.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 3:33 PM · Report

99

@Mr. J - I hope you don't mean me! I like Erica, I think she's a nice person. I'm just excessively defensive of people who I feel have been treated badly (the LW in this case). We're not all Jesus*, and we're not all capable of forgiving everything that people do to us. If someone has been seriously hurt by someone else, I think our primary concern should be with the person who was wronged, and I think making that person feel bad for not being capable of sainthood-level forgiveness just adds to that hurt. I don't like that. Which is why I reacted strongly to Erica's comment.

@ankyl - I'm inclined to think that's not what she meant to say, but that's how it came off to me. (As I said in my post/above) And the LW's writer didn't seek forgiveness, did he?

Posted by mydriasis on February 29, 2012 at 3:41 PM · Report

100

@99 "the LW's husband didn't seek forgiveness, did he"
No, and I currently agree with you (see @88) that he's a jerk, though I won't agree that what he did was as bad as hitting her. My initial assertion that she could forgive him was based on thinking that he had apologized. My current guess is that he's telling her it's no big deal. If so, that makes him an asshole in my book.

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 3:57 PM · Report

101

@96 Best Slog come-on ever!

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 3:58 PM · Report

102

E and My are doing my work for me.

Posted by Hunter78 on February 29, 2012 at 4:07 PM · Report

103

@100

Fair enough.
I didn't mean to imply it was as bad. I think most people would consider it nowhere near as bad (personally, I would find it to be worse - but I find emotional pain much worse than physical pain).

I fully respect your personal life choices - for the record. (Not that you'd have any reason to care if I do!)

P.S. @99 I really mean ankyl's comment about wanting to prove Erica's life a failure, not Mr. J. I don't want that! If it makes you feel any better, Hunter also recently expressed his extreme dislike for me.

Posted by mydriasis on February 29, 2012 at 4:16 PM · Report

104

Sure we are, Hunter. Run along.

Posted by mydriasis on February 29, 2012 at 4:23 PM · Report

105

I couldn't have done this without you Dan, thanks again for helping my brain work, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7kjqAwhS…

Posted by Sirus on February 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM · Report

106

Can I just say it is so wonderful to hear the support of HEARTBROKEN on this forum?

I was in a less-intense situation myself earlier: really into the idea of a 3some, but turned a particular girl down (cause she was a malicious motherfucker.) Then found out my partner had been sexting her behind my back AFTER I communicated to him that it was never gonna happen with her.

On top of the broken betrayal, I felt intense guilt about whether I was being too prudish or restrictive, not "GGG" enough. Heartbroken, you are a saint, and a gem among women. Dan doesn't often call out people's partners... take that as a sign of just how guiltless and wonderful you are in this situation!

Posted by Martychan on February 29, 2012 at 4:50 PM · Report

107

@37: Yes, this. I suspect the overriding reaction in the moment will be: "What the fucking fuck? How many times have I fucking TOLD YOU I wasn't into this? Are you fucking DEAF? Or do you just fucking not give a shit about my feelings?"

This is more or less the reaction that Heartbroken is expressing, albeit in gentler words. That she kept it to herself so as to not disrupt the moment certainly doesn't mean she didn't feel something substantially similar inside.

The only place I've ever seen the reaction where the one being surprised finds out in the moment that it, improbably and to their amazement, turns them on, is in sex fiction.

Posted by avast2006 on February 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM · Report

108

@77 No one says that was okay. Just (conceivably) forgivable, if he were really, truly sorry. Which he apparently isn't.

@87 good suggestion – though it may be harder than you think to find gay guys who don't mind fucking alongside a straight couple.

@103, oh dear, everyone's already in agreement. What shall we do now? :-)

Posted by EricaP on February 29, 2012 at 5:08 PM · Report

109

@32 - everyone has rape fantasies. Probably even him. I wouldn't bring it up either though.

@56 - it looks like he wasn't putting as much effort into realizing your fantasies as you were his. GGG is not one way.

I agree with Erica that the LW's case is survivable if he's not an asshole in general. I find it hard to imagine he isn't though, or isn't spending his time now crawling on his knees begging forgiveness. And why does the LW question whether she is right to feel bad if she was very clear with him to begin with? If she wasn't clear about it I could see where her doubt might come in, and the entire situation occur.

Posted by gnot on February 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM · Report

110

@56 - solution - only you get to pick them. Which should have been the obvious rule from the start. I can't imagine why you would sign up for his fantasy otherwise.

Posted by gnot on February 29, 2012 at 5:49 PM · Report

111

@7: Agreed!

Posted by auntie grizelda on February 29, 2012 at 6:07 PM · Report

112

"...an MFF threesome is not something you would be able to do for or with him anytime soon."

I believe you meant to say "would NOT be able to do." Normally I wouldn't point out typos, but this one seems to be pretty significant.

Posted by El Bruce on February 29, 2012 at 7:37 PM · Report

113

Yeah I'm with mydriasis (and all those worrying their not being GGG enough for some jerkwad who "loves them") on this one.
But all props to Erica for winning GGG forever and to ankly for quoting Buffy.

Posted by chi_type on February 29, 2012 at 7:56 PM · Report

114

sorry *they're

Posted by chi_type on February 29, 2012 at 7:57 PM · Report

115

EricaP chooses to use examples from her own life. I don't think she's trying to convert anyone to her way of thinking, let alone tell them they have to follow her advice, but she's willing to offer her own personal experiences. Nothing more.

Clearly what happened to LW1 is a big deal, and it seems to me she was asking Dan for clarification about whether she was justified in feeling violated. My interpretation is that she has tried to present her issue to hubby who doesn't realize how deeply she was affected, and she wants validation.

I would consider it necessary for any couple, group, whatever mix wanting to invite more people into an encounter to set ground rules. If you were choosing to be part of an MMF threeway (most likely at the F's suggestion), would you automatically assume that there would be no M-on-M, or would you like that addressed ahead of time so that nothing happens "In the heat of the moment"?

Posted by Cherry on February 29, 2012 at 8:05 PM · Report

116

I am way late to this party, but to Erica's comment @75--

"if you can remember the condom, you can remember to check with your wife (right there, next to you) if this is okay."

or maybe you could remember to keep your cock out of the guest pussy. Just a suggestion....

Posted by catballou on February 29, 2012 at 8:25 PM · Report

118

ankylosaur @95, that makes me feel like I belong around here. Thank you.

It's a little fucked up how much I appreciate that

Posted by catballou on February 29, 2012 at 8:33 PM · Report

120

I'm not trying to prove that EricaP's life is a failure.

Posted by nocutename on February 29, 2012 at 10:43 PM · Report

121

#53 - Your first paragraph is just plain stupid, because she was unrealistic in thinking he would have no problem sticking with the ground rules once they all got naked, and your second paragraph makes no sense at all.

#57 - Why the hell did she GO to Mike Tyson's hotel room if she didn't plan to ball him? So she could cry "rape" and get a boatload of money from him?

Posted by wayne on February 29, 2012 at 11:29 PM · Report

122

@102(Hunter), but why do you consider it your work? Wouldn't it be better to let people find their own happiness than to insist you know where they should look?

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:30 PM · Report

123

@99, fair enough. I don't know for a fact that he's a jerk (which is EricaP's position now), but maybe he is.

My point about forgiveness is simple: that it's a fine (and difficult) art to know when to forgive and when not to forgive, and that the fact we all need forgiveness at some point may humble us to the pain others inflict on us. We've all inflicted pain on others, and only these others know if the pain was 'too much' or not. And what is 'too much' for one person may not be for another. You feel emotional pain is worse than physical pain; someone else might think the opposite; and both would be OK.

Standing for oneself and forgiving are NOT in opposition. Like all yin-yang relationships, in some strange way they are intrinsically connected and depend on each other.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:34 PM · Report

124

IF YOU DON'T WANT YOUR HUSBAND TO FUCK ANOTHER WOMAN, WHY ARE YOU ENCOURAGING HIM TO GET NAKED WITH ONE? REGARDLESS OF WHAT HE PROMISES HE WILL OR WON'T DO, YOU HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE RESULTS, AND THAT INCLUDES YOUR CONVENIENT "HEARTACHE." HIS SO-CALLED "VIOLATION" WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED IF YOU HADN'T SET THE WHOLE THING UP.

Posted by wayne on February 29, 2012 at 11:38 PM · Report

125

@120(nocutename) I know. I hope you didn't think I meant you? I was talking about people like Hunter above.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:41 PM · Report

126

@124, really? So the guy had no choice in the story? He was just a little lamb, manipulated by Heartbroken into performing a sex act he didn't want to just because she set up the situation? Why, what a little naive flower he would have to be!

Besides being unable to find the caps lock key, you do find convenient ways of de-humanizing and taking all agency away from this poor. Geesh, some people are just so blatantly anti-male.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:44 PM · Report

127

@124, really? So the guy had no choice in the story? He was just a little lamb, manipulated by Heartbroken into performing a sex act he didn't want to just because she set up the situation? Why, what a little naive flower he would have to be!

Besides being unable to find the caps lock key, you do find convenient ways of de-humanizing and taking all agency away from this poor guy. Geesh, some people are just so blatantly anti-male.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:44 PM · Report

128

@121, you really think that "you'll go to prison if you break a law and get caught even if you find the law silly" makes no sense at all? Be careful when the police is around then.

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:47 PM · Report

129

@118(catballou), you're welcome! Gee, this is not even my site and I can help you feel like you belong here? That makes my day. :-)

Posted by ankylosaur on February 29, 2012 at 11:49 PM · Report

130

Sad to see the amount of people here who are ripping into heartbroken. Personally I completely understand the situation she is in and I think her husband fucked up big.

Many people here seem to think that since she agreed to a threesome then she agreed to VP between her husband and the other woman... Really?

If someone agrees to do some light bondage, do they automatically agree to anything the other person feel like doing once they are tied up? Since you know... what do they expect to happen?

Sounds a lot like the reasoning many people use to justify rape. Well she went home with the guy... what did she expect to happen? Well she wore a short skirt, what did she expect would happen?

This is a complete violation of trust and his wife has every right to be pissed off with him.

No good sexual partner will willingly put their partner through a sexual act they do not wish to partake in.

Posted by VB on March 1, 2012 at 12:32 AM · Report

131

I'm never going to take part in a three way. How much attention do you give to the partner you are currently not active with? For me a big part of good sex is carefully reading body language and emotion from my partner (since it seems so fucking difficult for them to tell me what they want, and when they want it). How much of the third's "reaction" leaks into the active couple's consciousness? If you (either or both of the active couple) look over and see the third closing down hard in her body language (as I imagine Heartbroken must've) wouldn't you stop and go to her aid?

Trying to gauge the physical and emotional wellbeing of 2 partners seems like a daunting task.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 1, 2012 at 4:09 AM · Report

132

Slash's idea strikes me as the equivalent of the husband showing up at the home with his pregnant 18 year old lingerie model girlfriedn and declaring that--surprise!--the husband now wants to fulfill his fantasy of having a concubine.

Surely Slash could see how, despite her prior stance against such concubines moving in, she would suddenly be overtaken by the moment and immediately begin reorganizing the house to accomodate the pregnant, horny teen who loves her husband deeply.

Posted by Snowguy on March 1, 2012 at 5:15 AM · Report

133

@131 Married in MA
Isn't it two-on-one with the role of "one" being handed around to some extent? (depends on their orientations and boundaries). It shouldn't matter that you don't have contact with one of the other two, there should always be something for you going on. How inconsiderate would you have to be to allow anyone to sit on the sideline, let alone allow them to be forgotten there? That's like having one-on-one sex and suddenly getting up to go masturbate alone in another room.

Posted by Mr. J on March 1, 2012 at 6:15 AM · Report

134

@131 Married in MA
Or look at it this way: There is no "active couple." There is an active triad.

Posted by Mr. J on March 1, 2012 at 6:17 AM · Report

135

Mr. J.@134, ideally, you're right.

But with people who aren't experienced at threesomes, I think it can lead to one person feeling left out. Someone may feel ambivalent about the whole enterprise, or may have performance anxiety in front of a new person, or whatever. I do think couples should consider high end sex workers -- their job makes them very talented at figuring out what people want and what they're scared of, and providing reassurance, and slowing things down if someone's uncomfortable.

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 7:26 AM · Report

136

@120, ok, but your post @21 was a harsh appraisal, warning me not to give vulnerable women advice lest they end up in a bad situation like me.

Frankly, if the LW's husband were sincerely apologetic for his screw-up, and if the rest of their marriage felt solid, then I would still be encouraging her to consider forgiving him. Our culture provides plenty of support for the idea that women should immediately dump a man who breaks one of the woman's rules about sex.

But re-reading the letter, she seems to have been told to get over her feelings, which suggests that he's not apologetic. And that's what brought me to change my mind, in this particular case. My general opinion on forgiveness follows ankylosaur's @123.

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 7:35 AM · Report

137

SLASH: your husband is being very nice by agreeing to have a MMF threesome. He's trying to accommodate your fantasies as closely as he can deal with.

And you're repaying him by setting him up for a sexual experience he explicitly told you he didn't consent to?

Unbelievable.

No means no, SLASH. Say it twenty times before bed every night for the next fifty years.

Posted by Teal on March 1, 2012 at 9:08 AM · Report

138

Hello everyone. New here. How are you?

Forgiveness: I believe that if you are genuine, humble and proactive about correcting your mistakes --and that you mean it--, then forgiveness should be granted. Sometimes, we step over someone else's boundaries without intending to. We all fuck up sometimes. If the apology is unprompted, sincere and articulate, then I'd say let bygones by bygones and move on.

Posted by stay cheesin' :) on March 1, 2012 at 9:11 AM · Report

139

EricaP, my post @21 was in response to yours @6, in which you said:

"I'd love to hear that meant "I enjoyed seeing him enjoy himself, and give her pleasure, and I was more aroused than I thought I would be."

If that's the case, and assuming your husband follows Dan's advice and apologies to you, then you might see if you can reframe the threesome as a hot adventure, for yourself, during a private masturbatory session. If so, then try talking about it in a sexy way with your husband (either as equals, or saying he was a bad boy, or whatever else comes to mind). If you decide to move forward and share more adventures with him, I think that will work best if you can forgive & forget what he did, and give him another honest chance to get it right."

But if your phrase meant: "It wasn't as bad as I thought, and I was proud of myself for being so GGG, even though I wasn't aroused" -- then just work on rebuilding your trust in your marriage in other ways, and maybe plan an adventure to which you both can look forward."

Given that Heartbroken described herself as "heartbroken," I thought this response was unwarranted. It's not that I don't hope that she and her husband can't get past this and resume a happy and fulfilling marriage. I do. But given what she and I see as the insensitivity of his breach; the violation of trust; the pure "I'm-entitled-to-it-cause-I-want-it-and-don't-care-what-I-have-to-do-to-get-it," and the "so-I-promised---sorry" selfishness of what he's done when his wife was being more GGG than a whole lot of wives are; the fact that she never suggests that this threesome was anything other than his idea or done for *his* pleasure; and the fact that, at least as the letter is written, there doesn't seem to be any indication that he has offered a true, heartfelt apology, or even seen how devastated she is; given all that, I found your suggestions of how Heartbroken can turn this into another way to be accommodating and can find something sexually exciting about an incident in which her husband betrayed her to be insulting and dismissive of her pain. She wasn't writing asking how to turn this into fodder for a hotter sex life with her husband; she was writing seeking confirmation that her feelings of wretchedness were justified, which again, leaves me to conclude that the response her husband is giving her is along the lines of "I'm sorry: I got carried away in the moment. Look, I said I'm sorry; get over it already."

I thought you were being insensitive from your perch above what you self-describe as the peak of the GGG/Forgivess mountain. Maybe you hear that last line as harsher than I intend it, so let me try to clarify.

It's true that due to things you've written, I think that at times you are putting a positive spin on situations or circumstances that you wouldn't have chosen voluntarily. That can be a good thing. Sometimes I am not sure that you are entirely happy with the situations your husband has led you into, but I'm not suggesting that you're a bad person, or delusional or whatever else you may have interpreted my critique @21 to mean. As I tried to say in that post, you have some unique tools to combat that situation with, and you have your reasons for trying to make your marriage work on what appears to be--because you only write what you write--only your husband's terms (there could very well be terms of your marriage's continued existence that your husband has had to accommodate himself to, which you simply haven't told us here; there probably are. But from what you've written, midlife crisis or not, your husband presented you with an ultimatum about 2 years ago which you have capitulated to in what sounds like ways that have left you little consideration for your own desires [although you have regained the beatings you missed]).

So you are already a GGG person, and you don't want to lose your husband, whom you love and there are children. You have good reasons for doing what you're doing. But please recognize that everyone isn't you; and not everyone wants to be like you. And not everyone can be you.

I don't know if I've explained things here or made you angrier by this post. But you've shared things over the years that hint at your unhappiness (although when someone tries to sympathize with you, you get very defensive), and then you urged a similar mindset/reaction on a person who is right now in a lot of emotional turmoil. What's right for you might not work for everyone.

More...

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 9:19 AM · Report

140

@ 137: If the husband isn't into gay stuff, then why is he trying a threesome with his wife and another man? Surely, there are other ways the husband can cater to his wife's fantasies without compromising his own likes and dislikes. The math doesn't add up. That's a bit emasculating, what SLASH is trying to pull off. That, and what was Dan trying to say? That someone is a stupid motherfucker? ;) hehe

Posted by stay cheesin' :) on March 1, 2012 at 9:20 AM · Report

141

Cheers On for Dan getting that new show on 'MTV' with 'Savage U'. Going global :) .

Posted by stay cheesin' :) on March 1, 2012 at 9:27 AM · Report

142

@96 (Mr. J): Throttle Frank Churchill?
Really? I'd like to hang out with Frank Churchill.
It would be fun.
Now if want to get a party together to throttle Mrs. Elton, I could be part of that!

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 9:29 AM · Report

143

EricaP: For the record, I don't think that Heartbroken shouldn't forgive her husband--although I think he needs to convince her of his true repentance by acknowledging her pain and the depth of his betrayal in a real, sincere, and meaningful way. I just don't think "forgive" is equivalent to "and then find ways in which you can reframe this episode to make for a more exciting sex life."

It may be that Heartbroken should and can and will forgive, but threesomes will be forever off the table for this couple.

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 9:34 AM · Report

144

Ank @122,

Any of the super-posters here, and I would include E, My, and you among those, write more than the LWs and Dan together every week. I feel justified in commenting on this waste of band width when I think appropriate.

And essentially all posters are telling others where/how to find happiness, why do you think I should play by other rules?

Posted by Hunter78 on March 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM · Report

145

@131: 'For me a big part of good sex is carefully reading body language and emotion from my partner (since it seems so fucking difficult for them to tell me what they want, and when they want it).'

This is the problem right here. She told her partner what she wanted /when she want it and it wasn't well received. Either by the men being defensive or ignoring the request. So guess what? Because of the negative or the lack of response, she stops requesting what will bring her pleasure. And now you are back to being frustrated trying to guess what will work for her...

I have been in this situation too many times: men afraid to ask for direction (What are you into? Is this too much? Need more pressure? Do you need to take a break?) and unwilling to take direction/suggestions (Come up on your knees, your cock is hitting a weird part in the back of my throat. Sloooower please. More lube please. This angle will hit my sweet spot. Start slow and then build up.)

Not that what you are doing is wrong, but this adjustment will make it SO right...

Posted by albeit on March 1, 2012 at 10:14 AM · Report

146

This is why I personally will never be part of a threesome, too much emotional garbage to deal with no matter who says what. You want to sleep with another person? Fine, relationship over. I'm not a prude, just cutting pointless drama out of my diet.

Posted by PaulWall on March 1, 2012 at 10:30 AM · Report

147

@nocute, how do you interpret "I was completely down with every other aspect of the threesome."

I thought "completely down with" might meant "I enjoyed." Do you think that's not a possible interpretation?

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 10:44 AM · Report

148

@139: "although when someone tries to sympathize" -- if you offer sympathy in a week when I've complained, that's wonderful. If you insist I must still be miserable from something three months ago, that's irritating.

Why do you dismiss my joy in kink as just more accommodating my husband's desires? The kink is for me; his pleasure in kink comes from seeing how happy it makes me. We stopped doing it for years, because I was uncomfortable asking for what I wanted. His midlife crisis led to more discussion of what we each want -- which led to me admitting how much I missed kink. The Kink Is For Me. Clearer now?

I'd be fascinated to hear what each Slog poster wishes they got more of. Our culture blocks us from admitting what we want, beyond the basics. I urge women (like the LW, and @56) to think about their own deep desires, and expect their partner to be GGG too.

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 10:55 AM · Report

149

Erica, I interpreted that to mean "I had agreed to every other aspect." "I was willing to allow or engage in or approve" every other aspect.

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM · Report

150

@131(Married in MA), I understand your reticence about having to take care of two people instead of only one, plus relationships of different levels (there's a couple, and there's a third). But all in all, if we leave aside the amount of importance (positive or negative) given to sex in our society, the interaction between the three people, at least at an abstract level, is not different in bed than it would be anywhere else -- say, if you invited a new friend for dinner with your wife.

I'm not a specialist in threesomes, having had only two in my entire life. But the experience I've had is that, if the couple is on the same note (again just as in the case of a new friend invited for dinner), both will help the third person feel well and welcome. It's a team effort; it's not like you are the only person who has to think about how everyone else is feeling (they also have to think about how you are feeling, by the way.)

Also, between the couple itself, the feeling of happiness at watching one's partner interact with another person ('compersion' seems to be the term) provides a new pleasure to be enjoyed.

All in all, the biggest problems seem to come from people's reservations, embarassment, feelings of shame, performance anxiety, etc. But similar things happen in other situations in life, and much of what works in these other situatinos can also be transferred to the threesome scene. (Yes, social skills are important for threesomes...) If you are three, there are of course more ways to screw things up, but if you try to make the atmosphere as open and friendly as possible (as you would with the new friend coming to dinner), and if the three people in question are all good people without too much baggage, things have a good chance of 'clicking.'

More...

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 11:06 AM · Report

151

@148: Yes, clearer now, regarding your kink. And I'm truly happy that a potentially troublesome moment in your marriage led to an improvement in your communication and in your getting some desires met in a way that works for both you and your husband.

As far as offering sympathy and being rebuffed:

A) I don't insist that you're miserable now or ever. If I bring up things that you've written in the past it's because, like most people, I remember what I have read or heard and all of it contributes to an impression I have of a person which is constantly evolving (both people and my impressions of them). I can't "unread" or what I've read. I've also read that you're quite content with your life and I keep that in mind, too.

B) I can think of two instances when I offered immediate sympathy when you discussed something that was making you unhappy or seemed to be bothering you: the first was when you were dismayed because your husband had gotten a girlfriend, and the second was during a discussion in which you described the experience of meeting men who were very enthusiastic and flirtatious before you had sex (which you were hoping might have the potential to being an on-going FWB thing) and then they turned into non-communicative, apparitions as soon as it was over. You were saying that they were blowing any future chances with you because you didn't appreciate being treated that way.

In both instances, right then, not months later, you shot down my and anyone else's professions of sympathy or statements of support and became defensive.

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 11:08 AM · Report

152

Everyone needs to be on the same page enough about what is going on during the threesome. If that's not there, then more than likely that Samsonite pile is likely to grow.

Posted by stay cheesin' :) on March 1, 2012 at 11:13 AM · Report

153

@144(Hunter), the point is that you do this in an offensive way, whereas the other people -- superposters as you call them -- try not to.

The problem is not your opinion, but how you sound smug and arrogant about it.

For instance, in this very post you accuse others of 'wasting' bandwith, when bandwith is the cheapest thing here and this 'wasting' causes no suffering or problem to anyone -- be it Dan, you, the others (you can always not read what others write if you don't want to). And you're not taking into account the enjoyment these people get from posting and discussing interesting topics with each other. I.e., you miss all the fun they're having, and think only of the number of characters? Isn't that weird?

Frankly, it sometimes seems to me that your posts here are also a 'waste' -- you barely ever contribute to the conversation (except that one time about ethnic hatred in ex-Soviet countries; are you from Eastern Europe by any chance?), and your comments are usually hurtful, not useful, to others. Why do you waste your time like this?

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 11:17 AM · Report

154

I just wanted to applaud the use of malicious motherfucker in this column, and the support of the idea and Heartbroken's right to feel as her name implies.

I am a GGG, always have been, always will be. I've watched past partners P in V with good friends of mine, consensually, and really enjoyed it. But they've always been good friends and not randomly recruited. This may seem odd to others, but I'd rather have girls I trust in bed EXACTLY because of my fear that I'd end up in Heartbroken's position.

I think threesomes are always challenging to all involved (maybe not if you're seasoned, I can't speak to that) and I'd rather have friends reassuring me if I start to wig a bit. I know I can trust them.

I'd love to have a threesome with my current partner, but as I told him it's all about balance: if we bring a girl to bed, then I want to bring a man to bed. He can't wrap his head around that but he's trying.

My question for the room: I'm bisexual and he's not. Does that fact make my request unreasonable? I'm of the opinion that if he gets P in V from a third party, I want P in V from a third party. Thoughts?

Posted by Elektra on March 1, 2012 at 11:25 AM · Report

155

@EricaP, nocutename, I also interpreted "I was completely down with every other aspect of the threesome" to mean 'I agreed with it', but not as evidence of enthusiasm on her part, i.e., I read it more like nocutename. But I'm a non-native speaker, so I never fully trust my interpretation.

Interesting, both nocutename and mydriasis think EricaP was belittling Heartbroken's suffering and basically telling her to (automatically?) forgive her husband and find some good way to save her marriage. I didn't think that whay when I read her post, though I did notice she (Erica) didn't mention her (Heartbroken's) feeling of hurt very prominently.

Maybe that is an example of our opinion of other people (an evolving thing, as nocutename says) influencing our reading of what they write (which is always the case, isn't it? We don't read Hemingway as if he were Shakespeare.) Since I wasn't here yet when Erica talked about her crisis with her husband, I never strongly associated her with that. To me, she simply seemed to be someone urging others to find out what kind of sex they like and try to find ways of getting it. So I read Erica as wanting to say, "OK, maybe this threesome went bad, but the next one can be improved, you don't have to be dismayed by this miscommunication/screw-up by your husband, threesomes can be made to work well."

I'm not saying I'm right (who is The True Erica or The True Mydriasis, or The True Ankylosaur anyway?), just that the mere fact I came in later had consequences for my reading of her comments. Interesting.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 11:33 AM · Report

156

@ 154 Elektra:

"My question for the room: I'm bisexual and he's not. Does that fact make my request unreasonable? I'm of the opinion that if he gets P in V from a third party, I want P in V from a third party. Thoughts?"

Alternate genders of partners each time you have a threesome. Or, just hook up with another couple, and make it four. Other than striking a deal to alternate between you get P in the V from someone else one night, and your hubby gets to put his P in the V for some other woman another night -- if not the same night.

You'd be better off having another couple (couple either in actuality or as just two good friends, etc. who happen to be one male and one female) and going from there.

Posted by stay cheesin' :) on March 1, 2012 at 11:43 AM · Report

157

@154

Plenty of straight women indulge their boyfriends or husbands in FMF threeways even though they have no interest in women.

So no, no your request is not unreasonable.

Hell, I'm straight, and would never do a FMF three-way. I'm all about MFM. That's the only three way I have any interest in doing.

Especially if there's M/M action.

Posted by blah on March 1, 2012 at 11:44 AM · Report

158

@Elektra, I agree with you that, if he gets something he likes in a threesome, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to get the same thing, too. In principle, your request is perfectly fine.

But the basic problem is that people are not always (what am I saying? they're almost never) sexually symmetrical. So the fact that you find something easy to do (since you're bi, FFM threesomes are no problem, there is no "icky barrier" to break) but your boyfriend isn't means that, yes, it is more difficult for him to do what you want than it is for you to do what he wants.

(And this is not only so in sex. Because I love foreign languages and have a near-sexual obsession with grammar, I'm also the guy who proofreads most of what my wife writes, both in English and in Dutch, languages I'm good at. Now, if I write Russian -- my wife's native language -- she could in principle also try to proofread my texts, and she does try, but she does a rather poor job of correcting my mistakes: she doesn't feel the same love for detail and grammar that I feel, so proofreading is for her a much worse chore than it is for me. That means that, in the end, I do most of the proofreading at home, and when I need my Russian corrected, I sometimes prefer to ask a friend to do it for me, not my wife.)

So, what do I say, in the end? That you're entitled to wanting PIV with another man in bed with your husband since he gets PIV with another woman in bed with you. But since the level of difficulty for him is higher than for you, and given the resulting pleasure asymmetry (you get something out of FFM threesomes while, right now, he probably doesn't get anything out of MMF ones), it will take a while. He'll have to be more GGG than you to do that, because, at least at first, the MMF threesome will be entirely for you. (Can you think of something else you're not into but you do, or would do, for him if he asked? This would be better to compare to him in an MMF threesome than the FFM one.)

Maybe your husband will warm up to MMF threesomess, maybe he won't. You'll have to see. Personally, I love MMF threesomes, but that's because one of my kinks is a cuckold fetish, so I'd love to see my wife having PIV from another man. (She doesn't like that, so we don't do this, but I would have no problem with it.) Presumably, your husband is not like that, and will need more time, reassurance, etc., for dealing with all possible issues involved (some kind of jealousy, the fear of being 'outdone' by the other guy, perhaps some lingering homophobia, etc.).

As you say, at least he's trying to get there. I hope he will. Good luck!

More...

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 11:48 AM · Report

159

There are quite a few studies that prove that the hornier us guys get, the stupider we become. This chap's entire career has been spent studying this effect (http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/about/janssen…) so whilst Heartbroken's hubby is clearly a fool, there may be some justification for his stupidity, even more so if alcohol was involved. Yes he was stupid, yes you should be angry, but yes, you should also try and forgive him. He was after all only doing what us dumb men have been doing for millions of years. Putting our dicks in a hole.

Posted by Ticklebum on March 1, 2012 at 12:20 PM · Report

160

I have never participated in a threesome although it has been, on occasion, a minor fantasy. However, I have often heard of them as a relationship disaster with one party of the couple becoming pissed off. Indeed, I used to be an acquaintance with a lesbian psychologist who did couples counselling for both gay and straight couples. Her view of threesomes was that they were ultimately destructive to a couple's relationship. Humans tend to pair-bond and sooner or later, one member of the triad will feel left out.

Posted by tmrobertca on March 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM · Report

161

@151B, too hard to dig up those threads now. I may have thought you and others were suggesting that I should change my ways. In any case, I apologize for any hurt I caused you when I was hurting and snapped out.

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 12:25 PM · Report

162

@154 Elektra
Your request is perfectly reasonable.

@157 blah
Is MFM with M/M something that you've found much of?

Posted by Mr. J on March 1, 2012 at 12:26 PM · Report

163

@150 ank,

Using your description of how things should be for a three-way makes me put Heartbroken's husband in the realm of "epic fail". If he's lucky, that was the last three he'll have with his wife (but maybe she's more forgiving).

@154 Elektra,

Depends on how hot you are for the other "F".

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 1, 2012 at 12:26 PM · Report

164

@161 I think I meant "lashed out"...

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 12:27 PM · Report

165

@154, "He can't wrap his head around that but he's trying." That seems key to me. Keep talking about both threesomes, help him take the baby steps to start feeling more comfortable with the idea -- maybe seeing you dance with another guy will help relieve his anxiety, or watching some MMF porn with you, or talking about it in bed together when he's aroused...

Laying down ultimatums can be dangerous, so it's worth avoiding that unless you really need MMF to be happy.

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 12:43 PM · Report

166

@163(Married in MA), that's what I think, too. Maybe he was soooo turned on by his fantasy coming true that he lost sight of who he was with and why he was there. Which means he didn't think ahead, and as people who don't think ahead are wont to do, he screwed up.

Forgiving him is a different question, but yes, there is no doubt in my mind that he screwed up, very much so.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 12:57 PM · Report

167

Who knows? Forgiveness takes time, no matter how much we try to will it along. Such is life. Makes you think whether or not, along with just getting caught up in the moment of lust, whether or not it was an angry gesture at Heartbroken herself. I tend to think not. Even if she was too stunned to react with her own integrity, Heartbroken does admit this: "I didn't stop it at the time because I didn't want to ruin it for him." If it pissed her off and upset her that much, and the ground rules were laid out, then what would keep her from having a go at saying, "Hey! Get your dick outta her snatch, asshole!" Of course, that's always easy to say in retrospect, isn't it?

Posted by instaconte on March 1, 2012 at 1:51 PM · Report

168

@98: That made me wonder if that was an actual, discussed boundary. Seems like the third would have known, and she would have been at least a little bit pissed at the third, too. Or maybe the third didn't know, and maybe the husband didn't know, either. Or whatever. Meh!

And to all you assholes piling onto Erica (in a bad way), back the fuck off. She's shared details of her life, and you're distorting them and throwing them back in her face, which is an asshole move, in my book.

And Ank: What you said, as usual.

Posted by aureolaborealis on March 1, 2012 at 1:53 PM · Report

169

@80: How far would things be allowed to progress? At what point does your "sharp lesson" turn into you being a perpetrator yourself of the very thing that you are trying to teach is wrong? I am reminded of trying to teach a child that hitting is wrong by hitting him.

The answer to that question figures rather importantly into your definition of consensual. Obtaining agreement under false pretenses, particularly when coupled with restraining the other person's ability to opt out at any time, is anything but consensual.

Posted by avast2006 on March 1, 2012 at 2:43 PM · Report

170

One thing conspicuously absent from Heartbroken's letter: Has she talked to her husband about how that made her feel? Going strictly by the words on the web page, she has been stewing in her own juices and is wondering when and whether she is expected to just get over it.

So, you didn't want to spoil the moment, embarrass the third, et cetera. Didn't you lay into him the following day for a good solid hour of hollering? You had every right to. Indications are that you didn't, which is why Dan did all the hollering for you.

Posted by avast2006 on March 1, 2012 at 2:52 PM · Report

171

"She's shared details of her life, and you're distorting them and throwing them back in her face..."

Andrew Breitbart will forever be defined by that statement. More the fool he.

Posted by Married in MA on March 1, 2012 at 2:55 PM · Report

172

@154: Since you are bi, you presumably get some pleasure from the other woman in his threesome. Since he isn't, he gets no pleasure from the other guy in yours. That means you are asking for the lion's share of the pleasure in the relationship. You are offering him a bartering chip of something that you already find pleasant, in return for a demand that he does something he finds unpleasant, as if that was a fair trade. ("I'll agree to eat some of your chocolate cake, if you agree to take out some of my garbage.") That isn't very nice.

Short answer? If you want him to agree to other guys for you, find some way to make it worth his while IN THE MOMENT, so that he is trading pleasure for pleasure, not pleasure for displeasure. 156's idea of making it a foursome instead of a threesome is a good start.

Posted by avast2006 on March 1, 2012 at 3:40 PM · Report

173

Seeing my husband make love to another man is my biggest fantasy of all

And you can realize this fantasy, SLASH. Every straight guy is bisexual, it's just a matter of unlocking that potential, and I'm about to hand you the keys.

Do the threesome as planned, but make sure the bi dude plays it straight at the beginning. Then, as your husband is proudly banging you from his favorite position and thoroughly engrossed in the proceedings, the bi guy should sneak behind your husband (quietly, don't want to scare him) and gently tongue his asshole. Things will unfold naturally from there.

This maneuver is kind of like the Vulcan grip, but instead of stunning a man, it turns him temporarily bi. Go, now, and do good things with this knowledge.

Posted by seandr on March 1, 2012 at 3:41 PM · Report

174

Late to the game, but cute, you definitely summed up what I thought about the LW, and Erica's response as well.

re: ankyl - I didn't say that forgiveness and standing up for your self were mutually exlusive or opposing in all cases. But in some cases they are. Those were the ones I was referring to. P.S. I agree with you that it's interesting the way everyone interprets eachother's posts.

re: Hunter

Dude's just a bitter old douche.

You could try to explain to him that other people here enjoy reading eachother's posts and learning about eachother's viewpoints, you could try to explain to him that the scroll button was invented for moving past things you have no interest in reading. But he'll still complain, and pull out some half-cocked rationalization for why he's right - that's just his way.

Posted by mydriasis on March 1, 2012 at 3:52 PM · Report

175

@161: You didn't hurt me in the slightest.

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 3:56 PM · Report

176

@175 glad we cleared that up. Want me to withdraw my apology, then? I just reread the July 13th thread, where you were so sympathetic to my pain, so I'm in the mood.

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 4:20 PM · Report

177

@175/176 - sorry, sorry. I don't mean this to blow up again. (Tech-savvy at risk youth, please delete my posts @176/177 if possible.)

Posted by EricaP on March 1, 2012 at 4:27 PM · Report

178

@126 re@124: I agree with you, too, anklosaur, that the guy did have choices--as did his GGG wife, Heartbroken.
WOW---@146 summed it up beautifully as to why I'll never engage in a threesome either. Who needs that extra baggage?

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 1, 2012 at 5:18 PM · Report

179

@112: I've actually never posted here before but I wanted to talk about your added NOT. By adding the not where you put it, you have created a double negative which would imply that a threesome is something she would be able to do. Is that what you meant or did you miss the not in the sentence as originally written?

Posted by anonymous commenter on March 1, 2012 at 5:46 PM · Report

180

The ironing is delicious.

I seem to recall a letter where the "GGG" husband broke down after witnessing the 3rd's "P" in his wife's "V." Dan did a cute dance around the subject and gave the letter writer a nice talk-down.

This column consistently encourages people who Google "GGG" to get into these situations, but there's no asterisk for *by the way, look throgh years of my blog to find instances where this kind of shit has back-fired and created disaster.

Dan, do you ever contemplate that perhaps you are "the motherfucker?" I know you have good intentions, but seriously.

Posted by Rick Santorum on March 1, 2012 at 5:51 PM · Report

181

@nocutename->@EricaP: "Forgive me if I say that I think you sell yourself short."

True, but that's only because EricaP is priceless.

Posted by seandr on March 1, 2012 at 6:21 PM · Report

182

EricaP, I haven't gone back through archives and reread the July 13 thread, so I'll assume that (again) I offended you.
I'm sorry; any offense is unintentional.

I do remember once suggesting that you find a different, perhaps better way to work though some issues when you seemed to be having a difficult time (after others here were rather harsh), because the comments thread here isn't really equipped to be a theraputic group--and I remember you got super bitchy back to me, which I pointed out didn't do much to engender sympathy.

The thing is, I don't care whether you're mad at me or not. But you can't post a lot about your personal life or your troubles on this kind of site, without inviting comment, some of which might not be to your liking.

I think that in this week's example of Heartbroken specifically, and in other cases in general, you have a tendency to ignore the emotional crux in a letter and jump in with sexual logistics advice or instructions. It often seems obtuse and insensitive at best or even arrogant. Heartbroken is in emotional distress--her husband has betrayed her trust--and you're offering suggestions on how she can incorporate a scene that has caused her a lot of pain into her masturbatory routine. She describes a husband whose behavior is stupidly selfish and inconsiderate, and you suggest that she talk about it with him in a "sexy way," perhaps calling him a "bad boy." That you respond this way is baffling, and suggests that you just don't "get it." So when I respectfully suggest that this is an inappropriate response, you lash out at me, require a ton of mollification, and then search back through archives to validate your interpretation that I misunderstand you and find you miserable when you're happy as a clam.

Let it go.

More...

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 6:30 PM · Report

183

@181(seandr): I actually like EricaP, which is why I said I think she sells herself short.
Apparently neither she nor a lot of others on this site, understand what that phrase means.

I think she's more deserving of respect from her husband than her posts concerning his ultimatums, acquisitions of girlfriends, secretly taking up smoking and lying about it, would suggest.

Posted by nocutename on March 1, 2012 at 6:34 PM · Report

184

@22. Thank you!!!!!! Perfectly said.

Posted by xweatie on March 1, 2012 at 6:58 PM · Report

185

@cute

I think she just has a hard time understanding how people without her tendencies (she's exceedingly submissive, and gets off on being dominated in every arena - or at least that's the impression I got/get? Correct me if I'm wrong, Erica) don't get off on being emotionally/psychologically bitchslapped.

A friend of mine, let's say 'Lori' slept with an aquaintence of mine, let's say 'Jordan' who I knew through my good male friend 'Kevan'. Because I knew what kind of circle they hung out in, I knew what kinds of women they hung out with (and dated, and slept with). Lori was not this kind of girl. One morning over brunch she said, in hushed tones "he tried to slap me! Like in the face! I was like 'no. never do that. What the fuck.'"

I said "let me guess. He was surprised."

He was. I tried to explain to her that the kinds of girls he's used to not only want to be hit, they demand it. I knew Kevin had to break it off with a girl because he didn't want to hit her with a closed fist.

Lori will never understand those girls, and most of them will probably never understand her.

Erica unfortunately seems to have the same problem to a degree. It looks to me like she thinks all women can (I didn't say should, but it wouldn't be a stretch) shift over to accepting any mistreatment that happens to them - and turn it into a positive thing somehow. She rarely recognizes that what works for her wouldn't work for many other women or men.

Again, to be clear. @Erica - I think you're a nice person, you actually remind me of a good friend I used to have (who also had a submissive streak like no other). I'm not trying to put you down. I'm legitimately trying to point out that I think you're missing a piece of the puzzle with the responses you give. Cute put it more eloquently above, but try to take it constructively, if at all possible.

More...

Posted by mydriasis on March 1, 2012 at 7:11 PM · Report

186

I just hope SLASH reads this column and doesn't make a dreadful mistake.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 1, 2012 at 7:33 PM · Report

187

What Seandr@173 is proposing is nothing short of of broken nose and fat lip for the bi guy, and a very possible breaking up of the marriage. That this woman predicates her sexual relationship on the violation of her partner's boundaries, however, is not only creepy, but should make her man question whether this relationship is worth it in the first place. Issues of trust, you know?

Posted by Alitowski on March 1, 2012 at 7:53 PM · Report

188

I think all 3 of these couples should get together, naked, and play twister. Lets see what p enters what v, and what p slips into what a

Posted by Drugs Delaney on March 1, 2012 at 8:25 PM · Report

189

@174(mydriasis), indeed in some cases they are. Hence the idea that we also need wisdom to know when to forgive and when not to -- and since only each person knows what suffering a certain situation causes, this wisdom is individual: only you truly know for yourself what is 'too much' and what isn't, even though others may have, sometimes helpful, opinions).

As for Hunter... yeah, that's the impression he gives. A pity. I hope he'll find happiness somewhere.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 10:46 PM · Report

190

@178(auntie grizelda), some people claim the same reason not to have any relationships -- why do I need the drama/baggage that a woman/man would bring into my life?

And that is indeed possible.

I will only say, in favor of threesomes, that, when things click, they are just awesome. And the reason is not so different from the reason why we say that groups can have more fun together ('the more the merrier') -- in these situations people will sometimes inspire each other in ways that usually don't happen if you're by yourself or in twos.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 10:49 PM · Report

191

@182, 185 (nocutename, mydriasis): but isn't it possible that you're also deducing a little too much from past experiences, rather than from what EricaP wrote here? It seems to me that there was a misunderstanding at the very beginning about whether or not Heartbroken really enjoyed most of the experience ('was completely down with all the other details'). EricaP jumped to the conclusion that Heartbroken actually wanted to get over her feelings. You guys jumped to the conclusion she didn't.

It so happens that I tend to agree with you guys' first interpretation more than with EricaP's first interpretation (i.e., I think Heartbroken didn't just want to get over her feelings, but really felt betrayed by her husband, and rightfully so, and was wondering what to do with him). But EricaP's interpretation doesn't have to be based on a desire to project submissiveness on everybody else: it could be just a legitimate different interpretation of the LW's intentions and feelings. (Note how she later on changed her opinion on Heartbroken's husband.)

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 10:59 PM · Report

192

@Married in MA(on the topic of SLASH), I agree. Curiously, though, if she had phrased the same desire differently -- rather than saying "hey, I've planned this ambush for my partner, how can I make it really work", she had said "I've been wondering if there is some way I can slowly nudge him in the direction of satisfying my fantasy... perhaps you guys know of ways in which a straight guy could see my fantasy as achievable in the long run?", then she might have gotten more sympathy, because she would be asking about how to negotiate (something Dan has often given tips on).

Because, after all, there's nothing wrong with what SLASH wants; it's the way she is going about it that is worrisome. She may imagine she's just broadening his horizons a bit (as if she thought 'oh, I'm sure he'll eventually like it and later on, he'll even thank me for that; and we all know that, heh heh wink wink, which is why I ask you guys' adivce on how to do it'), but it's much more likely that she's setting herself up for causing to her husband the same kind of emotional distress that Heartbroken's husband has caused her. Let's hope she sees that by now.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 11:31 PM · Report

193

@174 mydriasis: And here I thought I pissed him off!
Hunt, hang in there. I hope it works out. Maybe it's just winter gloom.

@190 anklosaur: I have to admit I've never actually tried being in a threesome. Unless all 3 people involved are 100% happy with what's going down, it just sounds to me like a recipe for disaster, however intriguing.
My one doomed marriage, for me, was bad enough. I'm thankful for the one fucking awesome relationship I have now----and to think my true sweetie was right there the whole time!!

Hey, everybody----it's finally March, and spring is coming!!!!!!

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 1, 2012 at 11:34 PM · Report

194

@193, threesomes are like everything else in life, auntie grizelda. Like, say, organizing a parties with poetry recitals. If you do them well, and if you choose good people, they're awesome, and you soon wish you could repeat them every week. If not all things click, chances are you won't have a good time and will end up having to reassure someone who felt nonplussed.

The difference is that, since threesomes involve Sex, This Big Awfully Important Thing In Our Society, if a threesome doesn't work people will often jump to the conclusion that it's because Threesomes Violate The Holiness Of Sex, Certain Things Are Not Meant for Humans To Do, instead of it being, say, because someone was an asshole.

Hey, I'm really glad you and your sweetie are enjoying each other! I hear your voice full of little birds, stars, and comets (plus classical music; maybe Chopin?) and it raises my spirits. Let me wish you lots of great sex in this budding spring. :-)

Posted by ankylosaur on March 1, 2012 at 11:57 PM · Report

195

One thing that really bothers me is that she didn't stop it. Her husband is all bad things but she should have got up, said "This wasn't in the agreement," and invited the 3rd to leave. She says that she didn't want to to spoil it for him. Um LW, HE spoiled it for him. I think that she should examine why she door-matted herself.

Posted by fragrant pervert on March 2, 2012 at 6:54 AM · Report

196

@173, you are genius. I'm not sure if an evil genius, but, you know, either way.

Posted by clashfan on March 2, 2012 at 7:10 AM · Report

197

@182 what's your own recipe, then, for forgiving a fuckup? What consequences do you think should follow from this betrayal of her trust?

Posted by EricaP on March 2, 2012 at 7:37 AM · Report

198

@159: There were other holes he could put his dick in that his wife had agreed to. But if he's too dumb to stick to agreed boundaries when he's turned on, then he's too dumb to have a threesome, and maybe too dumb to be in a relationship with Heartbroken at all. Period.

Man I hate evo-psych excuse-making.

Posted by Teal on March 2, 2012 at 7:40 AM · Report

199

Dan, Heartbroken asked for your advice and you gave it to her husband. Not only is it odd that you gave advice to someone who did not request it, but, more importantly, this woman asked for help and you ignored her, preferring to help her husband instead. Why is he getting all the attention?

You probably thought it was clever, but it was rude. You owe them both an apology: to him for offering unsolicited advice, and to her for ignoring her request on dealing with her issue. Which, by the way, you could encourage her to lighten up after you feigned understanding her.

Posted by TwinOtter2 on March 2, 2012 at 7:53 AM · Report

200

Dan, Heartbroken asked for your advice and you gave it to her husband. Not only is it odd that you gave advice to someone who did not request it, but, more importantly, this woman asked for help and you ignored her, preferring to help her husband instead. Why is he getting all the attention?

You probably thought it was clever, but it was rude. You owe them both an apology: to him for offering unsolicited advice, and to her for ignoring her request on dealing with her issue. Which, by the way, you could encourage her to lighten up after you feigned understanding her.

Posted by TwinOtter2 on March 2, 2012 at 7:56 AM · Report

201

That one part that Heartbroken says: "I laid out my ground rules, and they were violated. (I said I was uncomfortable with his P in her V, and I ended up watching them fuck.) I didn't stop it at the time because I didn't want to ruin it for him." She seems conflicted because she probably was turned on despite herself, hence why she couldn't/couldn't bother to speak up.

Posted by instaconte on March 2, 2012 at 8:18 AM · Report

202

@ 146 Paul Wall: Well said. It is fun to read and discuss, but carrying it all out is another thing.

Posted by instaconte on March 2, 2012 at 8:24 AM · Report

203

@182 also, re "require a ton of mollification" -- you're projecting. When I note my feelings I'm not asking anyone to change their behavior in order to "mollify" me. Do as you like; the only person I expect to be able to change is myself.

Posted by EricaP on March 2, 2012 at 8:52 AM · Report

204

@197: I don't have a recipe, and I don't even know that she was asking for one. She seemed to be wanting validation. Perhaps in her efforts to be uber GGG or sex-positive, or enlightened, she didn't feel she has the "right" to be so unhappy and upset.

I would suggest that the two of them have a serious talk, in which she expresses the extent of her hurt and anger, and her husband really hears her. And I'd hope that he would genuinely feel contrite and express that contrition eloquently and without defensiveness or excuses like "You didn't stop me, so I thought you were okay with it." I think his apology would probably have to include a component of "I got carried away," since I will give him that much benefit of the doubt, as opposed to him having premeditated it in the same way SLASH is considering planning an ambush. But I think the apology should go beyond that, should acknowledge a serious betrayal of trust and a huge degree of selfishness.

And then I would hope that the conversation expand to what Heartbroken's specific fears are--that her husband will leave her for someone who is better in bed, that he will become emotionally attached to a woman whose vagina he's been inside, whatever. And then they need to address and allay those fears. He could start by backing off all sex that Heartbroken doesn't explicitly say she wants (it is unclear from her letter whose idea this threesome was. It may have been a mutual desire, or one or the other may have pushed for it. Given her rules, I suspect that this was the husband's interest and she went along with it, but I could well be wrong).

He needs to reassure her that she, and she alone, is enough for him. Only after she feels secure in that do I think they can think about where they want to branch out sexually. But I think that this will take time, and lots of it.

More...

Posted by nocutename on March 2, 2012 at 8:56 AM · Report

205

@183: Well, your post @21 really rubbed me the wrong way. It was an obnoxious insult hiding under the guise of concern. Also rather presumptuous and condescending. I can't tell if you are envious of her, or just foolish enough to presume you have a better understanding of her relationship than she does. In any case, I think you owe her an apology.

EricaP strikes me as a happy, confident, and wise woman who knows where her interests lie. I also really appreciate the role she plays here - testing out new ideas, challenging conventional (female) wisdom, confusing the muggles. She is one of the forces that keeps Savage Love moving forward.

Posted by seandr on March 2, 2012 at 9:15 AM · Report

206

@204 Well said. He should make clear that his priority is to get her back to feeling safe, happy, and satisfied in their relationship.

I do want to elaborate on this: "reassure her that she, and she alone, is enough for him."

He should definitely reassure her that he's not looking to replace her or add anyone to their relationship.

But assuming he's still going to fantasize about other women (since people can't change what arouses them), do you think he should keep his mouth shut about that, or do you think he should admit to the ongoing fantasies, while indicating he will follow her lead as far as what they do in reality?

Posted by EricaP on March 2, 2012 at 9:26 AM · Report

207

Wow - reading the column and some of the responses I wish I had some of your problems.
Well, actually, not.

Call me insensitive, but what's the problem with "Heartbroken"?
She agreed to a 3some, had fun and then her horny husband and Thing 3 going all the way ruined her day? Really? What the h... was she thinking in the first place?
Agree, he crossed a line, but again, did it never cross her mind what could/would happen when they started the whole thing? After all his ultimate fantasy or so, right?
I find it a little immature to then go and write to Dan Savage for advice. Or is there more to the whole story?
Get a life - although, to me it looks she otherwise has quite a life, respect! - talk to him and enjoy how far you as a couple (Thing 1 and Thing 2) have come.
There's only one crack at life.

Posted by insensitive on March 2, 2012 at 10:23 AM · Report

208

@ 207: What I don't get is *why* anyone would want to try a threesome and not go all-out with it: all inputs. If there's going to be that much quibbling about what's kosher and what's not orifice-wise, then they may as well keep the third person over there in the corner diddling themeselves as they watch. I can get it if the proviso is no kissing, but everything else is game. Why getting head from another woman is ok and fucking her is not (all the while the threesome is going down) is a rule is beyond me. Either do a threesome or don't do a threesome.

Some people are cut out for it psychologically, others are not. I still think that Heartbroken, despite her emotional pain, was actually turned on by her husband and the other woman in the threesome, and she's torn about that. I'm not buying that she was that repulsed by it going down right before her eyes. She could have spoken up. She just didn't want to, or, was too caught up in the moment herself to honestly protest what was transpiring.

She gets her sympathy and helpful advice. Now she needs to hash it out with her husband and keep it moving: yay or nay.

Too much drama.

Posted by instaconte on March 2, 2012 at 12:30 PM · Report

209

@207 insensitive,

It's true that there's one shot in life, but this was about making the first attempt at many attempts to follow. Instead, Heartbroken is asking for help to deal with the failure.

Look at things from a slightly different paradigm, everyone knows if you play a game and break the rules, you lose.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 2, 2012 at 12:59 PM · Report

210

Eh

Posted by instaconte on March 2, 2012 at 1:14 PM · Report

211

Bye!

Posted by instaconte on March 2, 2012 at 1:16 PM · Report

212

@208, the point is that people can be afraid, even irrationally afraid, of all kinds of things, instaconte.

Have you ever watched a child learning to swim? I've helped several, and I've noticed they all kind of come up with strange security boundaries, even while we're still in shallow water and they couldn't possibly drown even if I weren't there. Some seem commonsensical, albeit unnecessary in shallow water: "keep holding my hand!" "Hold me by the waist!" "Be around!" Others are more surprising: "don't look away!" "let's always face the sun!" "please hold my Teddy Bear at all times!". The strangest one (and that from a boy who was already going to deeper waters and could float quite well) was "will you please keep thinking of me? If you keep thinking of me I know I won't sink."

I promised to keep thinking of him. Hell, I even did keep thinking of him, even though I'm entirely sure that my mental activity could not protect him.

And that's what happens with insecure people when they're taking their first baby steps into something new. They make rules that, from an unbiased perspective, are more to make themselves feel safer or better than actually solve any real problems.

So, when you want someone to start a new sex act they haven't done before, you have to be ready to deal with the 'baby steps' problem and expect strange reassurance/insecurity demands and rules. If all goes well, as the person gains confidence and feels freer in the new situation, these will weaken and disappear.

But at first -- call it a fetish if you will -- by all means do respect their rules. When you're helping a newbie, you should do anything to make them feel comfortable and in control -- or else they'll get scared and never come back. And yes, this means religiously respecting rules like "no kissing", "no penetration", and so on.

More...

Posted by ankylosaur on March 2, 2012 at 2:15 PM · Report

213

@194 anklosaur: WOW!!! We must be on the same page, musically! How did you know I've been playing Chopin? Opus 28, No. 15, "Raindrop" is my to-die-for favorite of all his Preludes.

Here's to birds, stars, and comets!

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 2, 2012 at 2:20 PM · Report

214

p.s. My love and I will be celebrating 30 glorious years together in 2012!
Nothing like seeing rockets and having one's glasses fog up while kissing!

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 2, 2012 at 2:25 PM · Report

215

Ank,

Sorry, I like it here. I'm not going away.

Posted by Hunter78 on March 2, 2012 at 3:12 PM · Report

216

@214 grizelda,

As long as you can get the kids out of the house!

Peace.

P.S. Wanna, wanna, wanna maaaake out.

Posted by Married in MA on March 2, 2012 at 4:11 PM · Report

217

Mesdames Cute/Erica - Your proposed conversation for the couple would not be a bad idea - if either half were the woman or man capable of saying or hearing such things. That seems about as improbable as the idea of the calculating and farsighted Mrs Lorrimer killing Mr Shaitana in Cards on the Table on the spur of the moment - not dans son caractere.

Ms Cute - as I'm sure you'll understand, when in good form, Ms Erica often reminds me of Miss Brodie's style of education - leading out what is already inside of the LWs.

Posted by vennominon on March 2, 2012 at 5:08 PM · Report

218

Mr Avast - While I don't advocate such tactics in general, this couple needs a sharp shock if they are to survive and advance. I'd probably advise divorce simply because the situation has become so much worse than it need have been, which to my tired old eyes indicates a mismatch. But, as I am nothing if not flexible, I shall adjust the situation to something a little closer to equitable. She orders an escort and just happens to order a male instead of a female. Oops. Was it deliberate? As deliberate as his getting carried away.

Posted by vennominon on March 2, 2012 at 5:15 PM · Report

219

Mr Ank - This is not a comment but an observation only. You seem rather fey of late. Have you any idea why?

Posted by vennominon on March 2, 2012 at 5:24 PM · Report

220

Mr J - I thank you, but I am not unretiring. Besides, it would never work; I'd decline the threesome that would be bound to be proposed ere long, and ill feelings would result.

Posted by vennominon on March 2, 2012 at 5:31 PM · Report

221

Just as a general remark, I notice that almost all the comments regarding threesomes involve a couple. What has anyone to say about the differences between such a threesome and one with no couple involved?

Posted by vennominon on March 2, 2012 at 5:35 PM · Report

222

@221: Mr.Ven: Now THAT is an interesting idea.
I'd guess the capacity for drama and hysterics would go way down and the pure fun might go way up (but there'd be less potential for the excitement of the erotic rehash.)

I had a MFM threesome with two brothers once, so no couple was part of it, but the sibling rivalry/dynamic rendered the whole thing really rather odd. And not in an especially good way.

Posted by nocutename on March 2, 2012 at 6:00 PM · Report

223

@222 nocute,

The classic fantasy: Being fought over by twins...

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 2, 2012 at 6:34 PM · Report

224

@217, I think we're considering an alternate universe where the guy screwed up in the moment but is very sorry.

@218, I was dubious whether tit-for-tat is ever helpful, but then I remembered my anxiety when my husband is out late without calling... I have been known to do that back to him, semi-on-purpose, and it is a pretty effective lesson on how it feels not to know where a loved one is late at night. So maybe your "inadvertent" sexual violation would also be effective.

Posted by EricaP on March 2, 2012 at 6:48 PM · Report

225

(@224 Not that this is a regular thing on either of our parts...)

Posted by EricaP on March 2, 2012 at 6:49 PM · Report

226

@216 Married in MA: What kids? We don't have any---unless you mean the wild, crazy two of us, my babe and me!

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 2, 2012 at 7:30 PM · Report

227

At this point, I would really REALLY like to hear from Heartbroken's husband. I suspect that it would be along the lines of "I kow it wasn't what we agreed to, but she seemed fine with it at the time, she didn't object".

(does anyone else find it odd that she writes "P in her V" but is OK with the word fuck?)

I think that all of us around here often forget the fundamental fact about relationships-there are 2 people in a couple type relationship, and those 2 people are the only ones who know every nuance of what happens between them. Those of us outside of that relationship aren't going to understand every facet of that relationship, because we aren't part of it. That applies to the letterwriter, who has only given one incident upon which all of the esnuing uproar has been based. It similarly applies to Erica and her relationship with her husband. We know what Erica chooses to share, but we cannot presume that we know everything, and it is absolutely not appropriate for anyone here to attempt to tell Erica how she feels or should feel. I have a hunch that this very smart lady knows a bit more than us bystanders about her relationship. And anyone who's been paying attention to her should recognize that she damn sure knows herself.

Posted by catballou on March 2, 2012 at 7:37 PM · Report

228

@223: Not twins, just brothers.
And it was more like they were fighting amongst themselves, and I was the playing field on which their battle was being waged: ("oh yeah? well, watch what she does when I do *this*!")

It was my first, and for many years only threesome. And not at all what I would hope for.
But it does sound good.

Posted by nocutename on March 2, 2012 at 8:21 PM · Report

229

I am going to frame this and put it on my wall.

Posted by fleeflow on March 2, 2012 at 9:14 PM · Report

230

@221/222/223

I had a similar experience to cute (they were friends, not brothers) and I also felt fought over. Despite my mental state (hash, ecstasy, meth, valium all mixed in there, plus just teenage hormones) I was pretty uncomfortable with the situation and ended up with just one of the two later on in the night. Being fought over is super sexy in theory but in practice it's actually a little scary.

Posted by mydriasis on March 2, 2012 at 9:41 PM · Report

231

@226 grizelda,

The kids are my particular impediment to stars and rockets (right then).

@228 nocute,

The guy fantasy of 2 beautiful twins fighting for your affections...

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 1:20 AM · Report

232

@231 nocute,

Of course the reality is that keeping 2 people occupied in conversation, simultaneously, is difficult enough. But an adolescent (of any age hormone-beast) never allows reality to get in the way of a good fantasy.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 2:00 AM · Report

233

@232 nocute,

Ahh, but I give really good conversation...

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 2:04 AM · Report

234

Very well done this week, Dan, Bravo! ALMOST as well done as using your amazing gay powers to forever associate the name of Santorum with...well, SANTORUM!

Letter no. 1: yes, the scenario as presented is nothing short of a RAPE once removed. If that were MY S.O., he'd not only never get another 3-some on my watch, he'd be fucking fortunate to get another 2-some with me.

Posted by AnastasiaBeaverhousen on March 3, 2012 at 2:05 AM · Report

235

@219 vennominion,

Which particular definition of fey did you mean?

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 2:14 AM · Report

236

Ank,

Since you're a student of language, I'll give you a morsel. "Wasting bandwidth" (with 2 "d"s) is a cliche from the early days of IT, which lives on as criticism of any wasted communication. Of course the superposters are not affecting the mass flow of the internet, but metaphorically they are guilty as charged. The real bandwidth for us reader is the screenful. When a superposter gets rolling, we have to slog through screen after screen of verbal diarrhea. It is not a victimless crime.

Posted by Hunter78 on March 3, 2012 at 2:45 AM · Report

237

Heartbroken,

If you haven't told him how you feel, you must. Guys can be very bad readers of women.

He might have read your physical actions during the scene as consent to take the plunge.

Posted by Hunter78 on March 3, 2012 at 4:29 AM · Report

238

227-Catballou-- re: Heartbroken's husband would probably say something along the lines of "I know it wasn't what we agreed to, but she seemed fine with it at the time; she didn't object."

Yes, that probably is what he'd say, but I can't see that it's any kind of defense. You're right that we don't know the rest of the dynamic in this relationship. So we fill in the blanks with what we know of our own relationships.

I've been in relationships (okay, one relationship) where the conversation dynamic went like this: I tell the other person that something is important to me. I'm clear. I say it again. I complete the communication loop by asking if it's understood. I get an affirmative. We talk more. I reiterate. I get no argument. I get more agreements that it's understood. I repeat. It's boring. One time I even made my target sign a slip of paper acknowledging that she would do as agreed. I have witnesses. Others hear the agreement. I write it down. I have not forgotten. This goes on many times over a period of days.

The other person does not do as agreed. I become angry or heartbroken. I feel violated. (Over an accumulation of years, I become depressed.) I communicate my distress.

The defense? "Oh, I forgot." Or "I didn't know it was important to you."

I refer back to my comment in 48. Heartbroken's husband may have understood Mrs. Heartbroken's discomfort as something that could be negotiated later as he saw fit. He may really be telling the truth if he says "she seemed fine with it at the time." I'm sure my mother was telling the truth when she said she forgot or didn't know something was important to me. The point is that it may be true, but it's not much of a defence or excuse.

What was Heartbroken supposed to do? What is the etiquette during a threesome when something is happening that you objected to beforehand, don't want to have happen in the present, and is happening anyway? What exactly was she supposed to do or say?

More...

Posted by Crinoline on March 3, 2012 at 5:05 AM · Report

239

Wow, Heartbroken was way more "suffer in silence" than I ever could have been. I probably would have gone into the closet and started stabbing a poppet with pins, brought it out and thrown it on the bed, then yelled something I couldn't take back.

That said, props to her for watching while she had her heart broken--but, she should have said something at the time. Now she should bring it up to him (possibly while she's outlining the reasons why he has to sleep on the couch). I hope they can work it out.

To SLASH: You dumbass. Fanfic is not real life!

Posted by Bea on March 3, 2012 at 6:15 AM · Report

240

Mr Married - The auld Scottish meaning.

Potential alternate phrasing for the question that was considered but discarded was, "Who died and made you Mrs Tiggy-Winkle?"

This probably does not mesh exactly.

Posted by vennominon on March 3, 2012 at 8:41 AM · Report

241

@240 vennominion,

Definition of Fey:
Chiefly Scottish : fated to die : doomed.

??????????

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 9:19 AM · Report

242

Mr. Ven:
I know Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle, but who is Mrs. Tiggy-Winkie?
And what does she do/symbolize/signify? Is the the Voice of Doom and Gloom?

As to Miss Brodie's teaching method or anyway her professed teaching method (ex duco), I'll refrain from applying it to EricaP, but instead say only that the more I think about it, the more I have decided that all teaching is a combination of ex duco and in trudo, which actions, particularly done in combination, mimic sex.

Which is thoroughly in keeping with the themes of Spark's book. Not only can everything be seen in sexual terms (remember Jenny and Sandy going into fits of giggles watching the needle on the sewing machine as it goes in and out of the fabric?), but education, the transfer of knowledge--ALL kinds of knowledge--is inherently sexual, and all teacher/student relationships thus inherently sexual ones.

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 9:38 AM · Report

243

Oh yes, Beatrix Potter's Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle, right? The hedgehog laundress?
Isn't she always merry and cheerful?

In that case, the irony was lost, but now it's been found. (apologies to "Amazing Grace")

Although I'd have to go back and read all of ankylosaur's recent posts to see if I see what you're seeing and agree with your interpretation. And I still want to answer both EricaP and Married in MA, so I don't have the time.

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 9:44 AM · Report

244

Mesdames Cute/Driasis - Ah yes, mixed versus unmixed groupings. Another stymie put up by the Great Wall of Kinsey.

Posted by vennominon on March 3, 2012 at 9:47 AM · Report

245

@243: So which is the ironic response to Ank's recent postings (which I haven't re-read)?
I obviously need more coffee, but am going to just go ahead and ask for help.

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 9:53 AM · Report

246

Ms Cute - Well caught re Spark, but I was deliberately avoiding being public about it. Agreed about professed.

Mr Married - You're being a shade too literal; I've seen the word often used to describe someone's mood as unusually up in some way just before a disaster befalls someone, not necessarily that person.

Posted by vennominon on March 3, 2012 at 9:59 AM · Report

247

Married in MA: I would love a threeway conversation! Like all good conversations, there is give-and-take, ebb-and-flow, and the configurations change from moment to moment or topic to topic. But if there is good conversational chemistry amongst the three and if everyone is considerate and stays aware, checking to make sure everyone is included (at least enough) then that conversation, while not necessarily as intense as a one-to-one conversation can be, can be totally delightful, in part because of the input from three distinct points of view.

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM · Report

248

@234 "the scenario as presented is nothing short of a RAPE once removed"

In my opinion, it's more like a guy agreeing not to come in your mouth, and then doing so anyway. What is "rape once removed" anyway? Anything sexual a person does that their partner didn't agree to? If you promise not to masturbate, does masturbation become "rape once removed"? Can we just use the word "violation" instead?

@238 "What is the etiquette during a threesome when something is happening that you objected to beforehand"?

What is the etiquette during two-person sex when something happens that you objected to beforehand? It is not unheard of for people to try, during sex, to do something that was previously declared off-limits. Sometimes the other person doesn't even mind, later.

In a threesome, normally if someone gets upset they stop participating, and the other people notice and check in. If your spouse is oblivious, you can tap them on the shoulder, or you can let it go and deal with it later. It becomes a data point as you evaluate your marriage in general. I don't see why it should be the determinative data point, but for some people, I guess it could be.

Posted by EricaP on March 3, 2012 at 12:35 PM · Report

249

Re: non-couple threesomes, siblings, threesomes, being fought over threesomes, twin fantasies, and threesomes in general:

I have never understood the threesome-with-a-set-of twins fantasy, myself, nor the threesome-with-a-pair-of-siblings. Although there seems to be ample evidence that people can be attracted to their relatives (wow: twincest porn), for me, I can think of no-one I'd less like to see in a sexual situation, let alone be in a sexual situation with than any of my near relatives. But it is a persistent fantasy, so it must tap into something I just don't get. Does part of the twin fantasy involve the twins interacting with each other, or is part of it that they would both only be fighting over/serving the third?

I've always fantasized not about two men fighting over me, but about being the center of erotic attention from two or three men. That seems to me to be very different. I don't like the connotations of animosity or competition in a negative way that "fighting over" imply, and I hate confrontations in general.

I've had very limited more-than-two person sexual experiences. My earliest was more of a tag-team kind of thing, involving two friends, which I liked. My second was the aforementioned brothers. This was a spontaneous experience, in which there was a serious sort of competition between the brothers which got played out on my body--the "winner" seemed to be the one that got the best or biggest sexual response from me. One would think that that would make me the "winner," but all the emotional connection was between the two brothers, and was also negative and vaguely hostile. I don't mean that I should have felt a "love connection"--this was a random hookup following a party--but even the most meaningless sex needs a component of connection for me to like it, and it was totally lacking between me and either of the guys. Instead, the connection, complicated, rivalrous, and competitive, was between them, so that even though they didn't touch each other, everything they did, they did in a way *for* each other's benefit. Ironically, although it could be argued that I was the center of erotic attention, I wasn't the true center of attention. As I said, it was weird, and I don't think representative of most sibling-threesomes.

Not long ago, I was in a two-straight-couple situation, but the other woman's role became more of an orchestrator than a true participant. This was fine with me, because I'm not at all attracted to women, and didn't want to really interact with one sexually, and it allowed me to finally fulfill my "center of attention" fantasy, with an audience, to stoke my exhibitionism. I have to say I loved it. And, Married in MA, there were times when only two of us were directly interacting sexually, but all of us were connected somehow, such as when I was being fucked by my boyfriend, but staring intently into the eyes of the other man, whose wife was narrating what she was seeing. In some way, the sexual act was simultaneously occurring between me and both men, or even between me and the other man by proxy, and at the same time, sharing the intensity of our gaze made it feel as though it was a witnessing and intensification of the sex between me and my boyfriend. I'm not doing a very good job of explaining it, but it felt easy and natural, and not as if anyone was being left out of the whole overall experience. But we all switched things up and made sure everyone was as included as he or she wanted to be. (And everyone climaxed by the time we were done.)

As to a FMF or a MFF threesome, most of the men I've been involved with would be interested. I have several issues/reservations. The first is as regards any FF interaction. I am almost repulsed by women sexually--just don't think I could do it, no matter how willing my spirit was, so it would have to be a FMF threesome, with no contact between me and the other woman, which is what previous bfs have expressed interest in. In other words, a "center of erotic attention" focusing on the man. This presents its own set of potential complications for me, as I can be a bit insecure about my body. I would be worried that I'd fail to measure up. But as long as I didn't get the sense that the other woman was going to be preferred to me from then on out, and that the primary emotional connection was between me and the man I was involved with, I'd want to give that experience to him.

I think the easiest thing for me to participate in as far as FMF goes, would to be someone else's third, either with couple or two other singletons. As long as it was still a "male center of female attention" I would probably really enjoy it.

More...

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 12:39 PM · Report

250

@248 responding to #234: YES! Thank you.
@248, responding to #238: Exactly.

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 12:42 PM · Report

251

@22 - Thank you so much for saying that. As a slash fan, I do NOT want to be associated with this bitch's underhanded, immoral plans for her husband.

Posted by cookiemom6067 on March 3, 2012 at 12:56 PM · Report

252

@95: ankylosaur,

"Disturbingly good"? I'm taking this as a compliment. Thank you. Although, I'm not sure what I did to deserve such adjectives?

•My exhibitionist streak and fondness for playing bass (or guitar) in nothing but heels or boots?

•Wanting to be the author of my life and thus not let experiences define me?

...

Anyway, I've had my share of registered and unregistered individuals express their opinion (unsolicited of course) that I don't belong here and am profoundly disliked. It happens. That is life. And, I would describe you (based of your comments) as a kind, educated, and passionate person. There is a lot of uniqueness and beauty wrapped in your humanity in my opinion. Perhaps, you're "disturbingly good", too? I imagine we both have yin and yang sides. A bit of bitter illuminates the sweet. Tyger and lamb. Dark and light.... :-)

Kind regards to you and yours. Take care.

Posted by kim in portland

on March 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM · Report

253

The discussion of whether or not he used condoms confuses me. Why would he have condoms if husband was not planning to fuck third? Yes, maybe husband and LW used condoms, or maybe they were using them during oral, but...I'm thinking not. A person -- male or female -- who violates a spouse's boundaries this way isn't going to be particular about following sexual safety measures that might limit pleasure.

Posted by otter2 on March 3, 2012 at 1:22 PM · Report

254

Alright, I know that this is anal-retentive, but can we please get our terminology straight? When you put letters next to each other, you imply the type of sexual interaction. MMF implies that there will be gay interaction (the M and M are next to each other), in addition to the straight interaction (M and F next to each other). If you don't want gay interaction, then use MFM. Same goes for MFF. If you don't want lesbian interaction, then list it as FMF.

Posted by Persnickety1 on March 3, 2012 at 1:50 PM · Report

255

@246 Mr. Ven,

I was not so much literal as uninformed. To my knowledge "fey" meant ethereal, or in the case of the Mercedes Thompson series, supernatural beings. Having not seen those characteristics in Mr. Ank's writing, I was forced to look it up.

I've lamented coming late to the game of classic literature before. I've a lifetime of "stuff" in my brain, none of which employs being fey.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 1:57 PM · Report

256

@187: You do realize that seandr is a rather sly humorist?

Posted by avast2006 on March 3, 2012 at 2:19 PM · Report

257

@249 nocute,

I guess the twin fantasy arises from the need for more. But I wouldn't really know having never done a 3-way.

I was considering my 3-way conversation experience, and happened upon the fantasy of 3 strangers who meet and share themselves. However, while I have lots of one on one experience, I couldn't recall any one on one on one outside of at conferences. Human interactions are oddly limited at times.

With regard to the 2 couple experience you had, it just reinforces the power of words to stimulate the true sex organ, the brain. I suggested SLASH have her husband and the third interactively read her work aloud for her for that reason. The downside of going to a non descriptive mode is running afoul of words' sometimes ability to bring intimacy to a screeching halt (what, you've never said the wrong thing at the wrong time?). And then there's singing, a fantasy which none of my partners could fulfill.

OTOH, here's to making your partner(s) unable to form coherent words.

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 3, 2012 at 2:49 PM · Report

258

@257:
I've had one or two wonderful one-on-one-on-one conversations in my day, notably one took place one night in Boston with my sister and a total stranger. We had taken a trip together, and were standing in line outside a North End restaurant waiting for a table when we struck up a conversation with the single man standing behind us in line. When a table opened up for the two sisters which had room for a third, we asked the gentleman to accompany us. During dinner, we had a pleasant, small-talky conversation mostly dominated by my sister and the man. After dinner we went out for a cannoli and cappucino and the tone of the conversation shifted and became more philosophical, and here, I was more dominant than my sister. AT the end of the night, we shared a cab and dropped him at his hotel, before continuing on to our hotel. Not so much as a kiss, a last name, or an email address was exchanged--but it was one of the more meanningful encounters of my life.

It was kind of like a couple--my sister and me--and a stranger. He brought a new dimension to our familiar dynamic, and allowed us each to see and appreciate the other viewed through the eyes of a stranger, while each got to feel that she alone held some unique charm.

It was also kind of a sisters-fantasy, even though it remained nonsexual.

It was a kind of FMF threesome, where there was little significant interaction between the two women, but wherein the man got to be the center of attention. In our case, this was because we are already so familiar to one another that we both welcomed the change brought on by conversation with someone new.

Posted by nocutename on March 3, 2012 at 6:15 PM · Report

259

To those on the other side of the wall, thank you for confirming that mixed and unmixed threesomes are more different than I'd have guessed had I thought about it beforehand.

The one thing that seems to keep being reinforced for me here is how vastly different the opposing monosexualities actually are. (Funny, because I imagine Mr Savage's mission to be rather the opposite.) My favourite bisexual people get this, and I've finally been able to pick this up as the common thread between them.

There are other question raised, but I'll worry some other time about whether secession is the ideal answer.

Posted by vennominon on March 3, 2012 at 6:50 PM · Report

260

Thank you for this brilliant post - the first question and your response brought me to tears... may all of us tread with such forthright grace...

Posted by prajna on March 3, 2012 at 11:24 PM · Report

261

Mr Ven: You keep saying how different the monosexualities are from each other; would you mind giving some perspective on how this plays out in a threesome vis-a-vis a couple and a third vs. a group of three single people?

Also, you referred to "opposing monosexualities" and spoke, as you have before, about the possibility of secession.

Why?

Why do differing monosexualities have to be in opposition? Why can't we learn from each other and find ways to appreciate each other, beyond mere tolerance of each other?

I understand the need for legitimacy, and for a place and position in which a relatively small group is in the minority (as an American jew, the feeling of being the majority when in Israel is indescribable). But I don't think gay secession from all aspects of mainstream American life/culture/politics/whatever else you have in mind is tenable. Plus it smacks of the Jim Crow south.

I'd love to be enlightened by you as to all these issues sometime. I'm really curious.

Posted by nocutename on March 4, 2012 at 8:18 AM · Report

262

Ooops: I meant to say "is in the majority!"

Posted by nocutename on March 4, 2012 at 10:25 AM · Report

263

Thank you so much, Dan for cutting her off there. That was hard to read. The column this week is pretty right on. Well done.

Posted by barfnoosemoosecrashesintocar on March 4, 2012 at 11:12 AM · Report

264

M. Ven@259, if I understand your point, you're noting that in a completely gay threesome (FFF or MMM) or a threesome with enough sincere bi sexuality, all three people will be eager to play with each other's bits, and not feel intimidated/disgusted by them.

Probably not always true -- people can be turned off by a specific person for reasons beyond genitalia.

But as a generalization, I think it holds up. I'd agree that threesomes are more likely to be icky among 3 people who are predominantly or exclusively het.

Posted by EricaP on March 4, 2012 at 2:26 PM · Report

265

@264 EricaP
Why would you get involved in a threesome where you essentially say to one person, "I like your type of bits but I don't want to touch yours"? That's gotta throw cold water on the thing from the start. Would many people feel comfortable performing in the face of such rejection? This seems materially different than 2 straight males not touching each other in an MFM. If you feel that way then either find a more compatible third or just go for one-on-one.

Posted by Mr. J on March 4, 2012 at 2:56 PM · Report

266

@264, you've never started sex with someone, only to find that they smelled wrong, or their penis was too huge, or they said something stupid that ruined the mood? To say that het threesomes are more likely to run into ickiness, is not to say that gay or bi threesomes could never be icky.

Posted by EricaP on March 4, 2012 at 3:44 PM · Report

267

Ms Erica - Clearly not always true. With couples, I thought the dynamics might be largely the same, as so often one half of the couple enters the threesome with a GGG mindset. But I had not counted on the semi-automatic assumption of the centre of attention that seems to be emerging. It was most instructive.

Posted by vennominon on March 4, 2012 at 4:14 PM · Report

268

Ms Cute - I was not fond of "oppositional" but had unluckily already used different in the sentence.

I'm more ambitious about secession - I want New England. The red states should be glad to get us out of their Congress. And, to make it even more interesting, I'd have two states run as gynocentric, two as phallocentric and two as mixed.

Posted by vennominon on March 4, 2012 at 4:30 PM · Report

269

Mr. Ven:
I think I may responsible for that "center of attention" thing you're calling "semi-automatic."
Keep in mind that this is just me and my mindset.

But I do take your point that in a mixed sex threesome, it would probably be best if everyone were bi . . .

Posted by nocutename on March 4, 2012 at 4:54 PM · Report

270

It also seems plausible that the Center of attention fantasy works whether all the participants are gay, straight, bi, or some configuration.

I understand EricaP's point that you can have the best of intentions and partway through be turned off to someone.

Posted by nocutename on March 4, 2012 at 5:19 PM · Report

271

@266 EricaP
No, not really, although the whole enterprise has become something of a distant memory.

Posted by Mr. J on March 4, 2012 at 6:20 PM · Report

272

@271, sigh.

Posted by EricaP on March 4, 2012 at 8:33 PM · Report

273

Does anyone remember the name of the book Dan recommends giving to religious parents when their kids come out? Looking to help a student. Thanks!

Posted by thanksforyourhelp on March 4, 2012 at 8:38 PM · Report

274

@258 nocute,

Sorry, but in your example you and your sister were already together prior to the meeting of your (magical) third.

The situation I was suggesting would require 3 strangers meeting for the first time. In my experience, only the guaranteed prior shared interests of attending a conference has allowed me this.

My most memorable 3 way conversation hook up was in a jazz bar in Copenhagen. 2 Swedish ballet dancers. Unfortunately the evening ended horribly, and I ended up feeling poisoned by the tobacco mixed into the weed we had been smoking. (One of the women had been a cult member, and the other triggered her breakdown by "outing" her and discussing it with me). I had a very interesting experience while I was there, though; at one point I was desperately looking for anyone else that had brown eyes (I've been the only white in black and asian groups before; this was the only time I felt something akin to panic about looking for someone else like me). Another strong memory: I stayed with a family that was raising money to adopt by letting out rooms, and they got their approval notice as I watched (one of the first times I was sure I would want children).

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 4, 2012 at 8:49 PM · Report

275

@274 amended,

My interesting experience was walking the streets in Copenhagen (not in the bar).

The house I stayed in was after I spent my first night in a hostel, and met a German couple that took me to the Carlsberg brewery. We hit the last tour, and I found out drinking 2 bottles of Elephant on an empty stomach, in 15 minutes, isn't for the faint of heart (I managed 2 other brews as well). For some reason I lost sight of the couple in the train station...

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM · Report

276

I have been involved in a few MMF threesomes, usually with a husband and wife. Before anything occurred, the couples and I would always talk extensively about boundaries. Since I was the "outside" party, I made sure that the husband was always attentive to his wife moreso than me. Also, if the wife did not want her husband penetrating me, that line was never crossed.

There was one situation, my first threesome, when I thought I would be having a sexual encounter with just a husband while the wife watched. This happened when I was much younger and this couple was a little older than me. I did not want to be involved in a sexual encounter with another woman at that time and expressed it. However, the couple felt I became "inspired once things were underway", and the wife became involved as well. To this day, I never forgotten how violated I felt.

I say all of that to say this...

1. to Heartbroken: although I empathize and sympathize with you, you had a right to stop the activity as it was happening. Also, if the other female knew the boundaries, she should have stopped it from happening as well.

2. to Slash: you are playing with fire with this one. Is it worth you risking the trust of your husband? What if your husband decides he wants to "snap"? Is it worth that risk? Some fantasies are better left just that...a fantasy.

Posted by broken beyond repair on March 4, 2012 at 9:22 PM · Report

277

@273 When POD wrote in from Ireland a month ago, Dan recommended this film for her parents:

Lead With Love: http://www.leadwithlovefilm.com/

Other Sloggers recommended:
- "For the Bible Tells Me So" (2007 American documentary)

- What the Bible Really Says about Homosexuality, a (gay-positive) book by Danial A. Helminiak, Ph.D., and Roman Catholic priest

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…

Posted by EricaP on March 4, 2012 at 9:36 PM · Report

278

@276 broken,

Did you mean FMF rather than MMF?

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 5, 2012 at 6:34 AM · Report

279

@ 212 ankylosaur:

Well said. The analogy about learning to swim is good one. You explain it all well. Thanks for that.

Posted by instaconte on March 5, 2012 at 7:53 AM · Report

280

@Married in MA: yes I did. Please excuse the oversight.

Posted by broken beyond repair on March 5, 2012 at 9:15 AM · Report

281

Ms Cute - Oh, agreed that it doesn't have to play out differently. There's no reason why it can't be one half of the couple being "GGG" in a bite-the-bullet way and the other half getting a selfish wish granted, but there are effects from logistical differences. I knew one couple some years ago, for instance, who had occasional threesomes mainly because J's favourite activity was X, and Q's favourite activity was Z, and bringing in a third was the easiest way for each to do what he liked best at the same time instead of taking turns.Not always possible, but you get the sense.

Posted by vennominon on March 5, 2012 at 10:43 AM · Report

282

Miss Heartbroken, do not be heartbroken. Turn it into a reason to focus on you and not bad shit done to you by people who are supposed to have you at the forefront of their respect-as I assume you hold your husband!! And Mind fuck is the perfect word set. Thanks Dan for the direction at her selfish husband and for wondering if the "extra hole" knew the queens rules or not. I wondered as I was reading the beginning of threes, as I know they (malicious motherfuckers) do exist!! I would assume she did and is a selfish POS too :(

Posted by wonderwoman on March 5, 2012 at 11:05 AM · Report

283

Dan Savage is a child molesting pedophile who sells child porn to Bill Maher

Posted by Hellpig on March 5, 2012 at 2:19 PM · Report

284

There is no "I" in "threesome."

Posted by theInvisibleDick on March 5, 2012 at 3:26 PM · Report

285

Slash,

Don't do it. He wants to fuck you, not him. He will feel his manhood under attack. He might lash out violently against the bi. He will hold you responsible for the violation.

Posted by Hunter78 on March 5, 2012 at 5:23 PM · Report

286

SLASH,

Speaking as someone who is 100% straight (yes, it turns out we do exist): if your husband is like me, it really is not going to happen. Even if he did decide to attempt to have sex with someone he is not attracted to at all, purely because he knows you like it, he'd probably have trouble getting it up at all!

Posted by Valhar2000 on March 6, 2012 at 3:09 AM · Report

287

Know yourself.

Heartbroken's hubby probably should have told her that, in the heat of passion, a P might end up in a V. And if that's not OK, then the three-way is off. Been there and done that (with everyone's blessing) enough times to know that it does 'just happen'* on occasion. Particularly when we like it rowdy and spontaneous.

*Put the condom on early. I've had as many women shove Mr Winkie in bare as I've gotten carried away and done it myself. The uneasy feeling afterwards just isn't worth not getting ready during the 4play.

Slash's husband probably knows himself pretty well. So she shouldn't be setting up a situation where things might go drastically wrong. But I'm wondering why, if hubby has clearly expressed his position in being in that position, she can't just file it away as a fantasy, never to be acted upon. There could be some sort of communications block where she isn't capable of replacing her internal image of reality with real life. I think they call this a narcissistic personality disorder, but I'm not a shrink. So don't quote me. I don't know sh*t (as the song lyric goes). But that is going to pop its little head up again in the relationship (not the fun little head either).

Posted by Holmes on March 6, 2012 at 8:12 AM · Report

288

This comment is for Heartbroken, and for someone else, too. I was the third once, and "in the heat of passion," what happened to Heartbroken happened, a very similar situation to this, and I knew ahead of time what the ground rules were, and I was absolutely culpable (and so was he, but that doesn't lessen my part in it).

And I felt awful then, and I apologized; I feel awful now, and it has been almost three years, and that awful feeling never goes away. I haven't talked to the couple in a long time and every so often something like this comes up and makes me want to write to them and apologize again and again. But what am I going to say- I'm sorry I fucked up so horribly, here are some flowers, and I'm also sorry for reminding you of that fucked up situation that you'd probably like to put behind you?

So, Heartbroken, though it probably won't help much, I wanted to tell you my story and to apologize again- to my friends that got hurt, and to you for getting hurt. I am so sorry. I have no explanation or excuse other than sometimes things happen, and they shouldn't.

I hope that the three of you are able to talk about it and heal. I hope that trust lost can be regained and hurt feelings can be mended, though I know that's not always the case. My pain at the memory is, I'm sure, nothing compared to hers, and I wish there were something I could do about it short of having a time machine to slap myself silly before I caused the problem back then. Rest assured I'll NEVER let that happen again.

Posted by cashew on March 6, 2012 at 9:53 AM · Report

289

This comment is for Heartbroken, and for someone else, too. I was the third once, and "in the heat of passion," what happened to Heartbroken happened, a very similar situation to this, and I knew ahead of time what the ground rules were, and I was absolutely culpable (and so was he, but that doesn't lessen my part in it).

And I felt awful then, and I apologized; I feel awful now, and it has been almost three years, and that awful feeling never goes away. I haven't talked to the couple in a long time and every so often something like this comes up and makes me want to write to them and apologize again and again. But what am I going to say- I'm sorry I fucked up so horribly, here are some flowers, and I'm also sorry for reminding you of that fucked up situation that you'd probably like to put behind you?

So, Heartbroken, though it probably won't help much, I wanted to tell you my story and to apologize again- to my friends that got hurt, and to you for getting hurt. I am so sorry. I have no explanation or excuse other than sometimes things happen, and they shouldn't.

I hope that the three of you are able to talk about it and heal. I hope that trust lost can be regained and hurt feelings can be mended, though I know that's not always the case. My pain at the memory is, I'm sure, nothing compared to hers, and I wish there were something I could do about it short of having a time machine to slap myself silly before I caused the problem back then. Rest assured I'll NEVER let that happen again.

Posted by cashew on March 6, 2012 at 9:56 AM · Report

290

@215 Hunt,

no problem. You're welcome to stay. I just hope you will try to avoid hurting others. Will you?

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM · Report

291

@219-220 (Mr Ven),

Re: fey (a new word which I didn't know before -- thanks!) I'm not sure what you're picking on -- I don't feel any different from usual. What do you mean?

As for a threesome not involving a couple: my very limited experience (2 instances) always did involve a couple, but my impression is that it would be similar to comparing a friend coming to dinner at your house (where s/he will meet your spouse) vs. three people meeting for dinner at a restaurant. I suspect that the presence of a couple will tend to put them in charge: they will be like Alpha Centauri A and B, closely orbiting each other, with Proxima much farther away (at visual magnitude -9, not even a disk in the sky). It would seem that the couple, in this case, has more power / is safer (they rely on each other) and should thus think more about the security/comfort of the third; while in a threesome-sans-couple each party is much more equal to the others, and the question of who the 'leader' or 'owner of the party' is is much more ambiguous.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 2:05 PM · Report

292

@252 (Kim in Portland), I did indeed mean it as a compliment, and thank you for your opinion of me. I try to be as fair as I can to all sides of a question, and I try to see how people relate to their problems and to what they say about them. Dr House would say "everybody lies"; I would say "everybody narrates."

You seem to be a person with great empathy for others, and with a strong desire to help them. You make me think of Tertullian's anima naturaliter Christiana (though I think he meant it in general, as in all souls have knowledge of good, I see it so often applied to naturally virtuous people like Marcus Aurelius).

I think now and then each of us feels "undesired", here in SLOG or elsewhere in life. I've had my time, EricaP above got some 'tough love' from nocutename and mydriasis, Mr Ven had his moment a while ago... But hey, we're more than that. Each one of us, who look fragile in some sense (animula vagula blandula...), is actually a little universe, no matter how simple we might sometimes seem to be to others.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 2:23 PM · Report

293

@291 Mr. ank,

I am totally clueless to whether this is how it works, BUT:

Could you put an ad in CL for "2 thirds" in order to provide an attraction to make a 3-way of strangers?

Peace.

Posted by Married in MA on March 6, 2012 at 2:31 PM · Report

294

@236 (Hunter), sorry, but it is a victimless crime. If scrolling past stuff is something you have to contribute to this page-after-page of comments (280 thus far and increasing), thereby making the "problem" you complain about worse (and engaging in what is called "performance contradiction")... then again, why are you here?

If you say you like it here, then the problem of bandwi(d)th is not serious. A 'victim' that keeps coming back must like being a 'victim.'

My point is simple. You like to post things like "diarrhea" to refer to other people's thoughtful comments, not because it's right (it isn't), but because it hurts them. That's all you do here: try to hurt the others here, those actually enjoy reading the comments.

As long as you acknowledge that that's what you're here for -- to hurt others (like a more concise version of Seattleblues) --, I have no complaints. Just don't pretend that you have other motives.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 2:32 PM · Report

295

@290

You're joking right?
His explicitly stated goal is to hurt others.

Posted by mydriasis on March 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM · Report

296

@294/295

Oh word - I guess I should have made use of MY scroll button right?

Posted by mydriasis on March 6, 2012 at 2:43 PM · Report

297

@258(nocutename), this precise experience (which I've also had a few times, also often -- though not always -- involving perfect strangers) is one of the basic reasons why I don't like to set sex apart from the rest of human experience. (Your claim that teaching/learning is sexual -- in-trudo cum ex-duco -- is also another similar reason. I'll only add that research, which learning beyond what is known, is similarly sexual.)

So much in sex is exactly like what happens in other things, the difference being mostly the exact kind of pleasure/bodily sensations that one gets from it!

In our society, sex is also associated with a climax of intimacy -- it's when you "shed all your barriers" and show yourself (emotionally as well as physically) naked, or so they say. It's also a moment of great physical/emotional closeness, or so they say.

It seems to me, though, that most of it comes from the mythology about sex -- the fact that we refrain from it for so long, and so often, plus all the stories and expectations we hear about it. All this meaning is not in the experience itself, in its phenomenology, in the hormones, orgasms, or hugs, but in the meaning we ascribe to it.

Being a human surrounded by humans is in many ways the strangest experience we can have. Only being truly alone could be stranger. Sex, in comparison, is relatively simple and straightforward.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 2:53 PM · Report

298

@295, in a sense I am. I don't think he'll change; even though telling a person what s/he is doing can sometimes elicit change, I don't think this is his case.

Still...

Maybe there simply is a part of me who wants to be an optimist.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 3:07 PM · Report

299

Ank,

I deny fully your allegation that I am here only to hurt others. I'm here to have a good time and entertain. I thought you were a better reader.

My,

I did say I wanted to take you down (because you're an obnoxious conceited twit), but I challenge you to find where my "explicitly stated goal is to hurt others."

Posted by Hunter78 on March 6, 2012 at 3:28 PM · Report

300

I'm actually going to let the stupidity of your statement stand for itself and decline to engage with you at this point in time.

Posted by mydriasis on March 6, 2012 at 4:40 PM · Report

301

You always give up when you have nothing-- like when you refused to defend your "Rainman" abilities.

Posted by Hunter78 on March 6, 2012 at 4:47 PM · Report

302

Isn't it soup yet?????

Posted by EricaP on March 6, 2012 at 6:52 PM · Report

303

@ 276 (broken beyond repair)
That wasn't really a 3some what you had in mind, or was it? Sounds more like a peep show to me.

@ 284 (the invisible dick)
Amen

I still don't get it: a 3some is not quite about vanilla sex, right? More about lust and enjoying the very essence of sex. So what are people expecting?
I am starting to wonder if some try a 3some either as some sort of psychotherapy or to prove (to themselves or their SO) how courageous or modern or whatever they are when in fact they are not and they are not mature enough to just say no or wait and develop that kink or whatever.

But calling it "RAPE" and people victims?
Come on, grow up, grow some balls and get a life that's truly your own - not something you feel you ought to try out because others do.

Disclaimer - never been there; have lots of interests but absolutely no desire for drama, whining and name-calling. Life is just too damn short.

Posted by insensitive on March 6, 2012 at 8:43 PM · Report

304

Mr Ank - You just appeared to have defaulted into Sunshine Day posting, in which every LW deserved to be happy and every experience could be turned into good. Such an unusual upswing in mood just caught my attention and made me think there was a disaster on the horizon - and anyone who thinks this evening an uncomfortably successful one for a certain person whose initials occupy adjacent locations in the alphabet can agree with me that disaster is a pretty good word for it.

Remember, I often agonize over whether a LW deserves happiness or not. Never let it be assumed that I necessarily advise a course of action in any LW's best interest! It just unnerved me a little that you were being far too nice to everybody. If I were in a strict mood, I'd call that somewhat lazy, but I didn't happen to be.

But I am pleased, knowing how likely you are to enjoy it, to have presented you with a new word.

Posted by vennominon on March 6, 2012 at 9:16 PM · Report

305

@299, of course you realize your answer to mydriasis contradicts (in background implication) your answer to me? And all in one post?

If you're not here to hurt others, Hunter, then don't hurt them. It's that simple.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 6, 2012 at 11:53 PM · Report

306

@Ven, and quite an interesting word it is (my OED tells me it is a direct descedant of Old English fæge 'doomed to die, fated', perhaps borrowed from Old Norse feigr of the same meaning, [cf. modern German feige 'coward'] but all ultimately from Proto-Germanic *faigjo-, from Proto-Indo-European *peig-, a root meaning, 'evil, evil-minded, hostile', of which the word 'foe' is a nominal derivative -- i.e., in the distant past, before English even existed, 'fey' was the adjectival form of 'foe').

Curious pronunciation -- I had guessed [fi:] (like 'fee'), but it is actually [fei] (like Fay Dunaway). If memory serves me, it's not what old English æ is supposed to have turned into. Something funny must have happened in the history of this word.

As for my fey state (I can't see it in my writing style, but then again I probably wouldn't if it were there...), you are correct in sensing doom. I am currently dealing with a personal catastrophe (the death of a loved one), and what you sensed may be a reaction to that.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 7, 2012 at 12:06 AM · Report

307

'Far too nice to everybody.' An interesting tour de phrase.

Make that my epitaph.

Posted by ankylosaur on March 7, 2012 at 12:10 AM · Report

308

@299 Hunter78: For someone who once claimed that I was "out of control", I suggest that you take a deep breath, and chill.

anklosaur @305: Amen! and @ 307: I want that on my gravestone, too!

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 7, 2012 at 1:08 AM · Report

309

@308, thanks! And, as for Chopin: well, Chopin is unavoidable. I'm not a musician, far from that; but even I have a few favorites (all his Noctures, which suit my moods, especially the Nocture in G Minor, Op. 15, no. 3, but in fact all of them).

Posted by ankylosaur on March 7, 2012 at 3:31 AM · Report

310

Sorry for the old post but have just discovered Dan's cole thecolumn and thought I had something to add. I wonder if Heartbroken or her husband told the third what the boundaries where. If they didn't then, in a highly charged situation, promises can be forgotten very quickly.

Posted by blam blam blam on March 7, 2012 at 7:39 AM · Report

311

@ankylosaur, sorry to hear your sad news @306; you're in my thoughts today.

Posted by EricaP on March 7, 2012 at 9:21 AM · Report

312

@anklosaur re #306 and EricaP's @311: I'm really sorry, too, to hear about your loss. Be comforted in knowing that you are in my thoughts and prayers, as well.

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 7, 2012 at 9:21 PM · Report

313

@309: Chopin's Nocturne in E flat Major, and Nocturne in D flat Major are two of my favorites.

Posted by auntie grizelda on March 7, 2012 at 9:23 PM · Report

314

Oh, I love you, Dan!

Posted by Ashley Jo on March 9, 2012 at 8:27 AM · Report

315

So I'm a little bit late to this party, but... @echizen_kurage, as a feminist and a slash fan/writer, I am so thankful for your input. Both the original writer and the commentator do not at all reflect my beliefs or opinions, but luckily you were there to show a much more positive (and hopefully) widespread) perception of both feminists and slash fans. Thank you.

Posted by Pearl on March 13, 2012 at 1:07 PM · Report

316

Thank you for this harsh response to Heartbroken's dumb-ass husband!

My partner and I are monogamish/polyamorous/whatever gay guys, who mostly only do stuff with trusted close friends who happen to have benefits. We have basically two rules that we've discussed:

1: If one of us wants to have sex with someone, the other person has "veto" power, to say "No, I don't want you to have sex with that person."

2: "Don't do anything that makes you sick, or could get both of us or our friends we have sex with sick."

With perhaps an implied and always adhered-to rule, of "Don't screw anyone without telling me first" (otherwise, it would be hard to do rule number one properly).

We have an incredible amount of trust in one another. About the most important part of our relationship is that we know, deep down and solid, as well as through experience and getting to know one another, that we're both trustworthy. I'm pretty sure neither of us could even _imagine_ violating the other's trust.

And if one of us did, that would be absolutely, positively devastating. It would make the person whose trust was violated not only doubt the other person, but themselves. It would be like doubting that gravity would keep on working.

And it seems kinda like that's what was done to Heartbroken.

Now, that doesn't mean they can't fix and keep their relationship. It doesn't mean her hubby is irreparably sucky. Hell - people do stupid things and make mistakes all the time. The important part is for them to learn and grow.

But if I were her, I'd want to see goddamn definitive proof that he'd learned and grown and there wouldn't be a repeat.

Failing that, as GGG as she seems to be (from what little info I have), some other person who is worthy of that would be happy to love her.

More...

Posted by CoyoteConscious on March 18, 2012 at 8:30 PM · Report

317

i'm more disturbed that people in this forum are MORE upset with the man in the first letter who was a dick and fucked up the threeway than the obviously deranged wife who is trying to find ways to trick and manipulate her husband into a sexual situation that he has IMPLICITLY stated he is not desiring. the husband had consensual sex with another woman.

the offender in the first letter was an asshole and if you wanna go to the edge, a cheater.
the offender in the second letter is a SEXUAL OFFENDER and if you wanna go to the extreme here, a RAPIST. the wife is attempting to create a nonconsensual sexual experience.

what about that is so hard to understand?
you hyperfeminists need to stop thinking about what's between your legs and look at the meat of the issues (no pun intended).

Posted by OregonRealist on March 28, 2012 at 8:54 AM · Report

The Stranger

In the News Section:

In the Food & Drink Section:

In the Music Section:

In the Film Section:

In the Visual Art Section:

In the Books Section:

A list of Stranger blogs:

Savage Love Online

Savage Love Podcast

Savage Love Archives

More from Dan Savage

Books by Dan Savage

Savage Links

Want a Second Opinion?

Contact Dan Savage

Savage on YouTube

Threes

February 29, 2012

Tools

Share via

Comments (317) RSS

Add a comment

The Stranger Presents

The Stranger

Seattle Art & Performance Quarterly

A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.

Going to Portland?