Hump! 5

April 23, 2009

By Dan Savage

I'm a 32-year-old, very attractive, very fit SWM living in NYC. I'm well-read and well-spoken. I march to the beat of my own drum. Friends tell me that my personality is intense. I'm extremely idealistic, and I count myself as a romantic. I'm interested in an intense and consuming love affair with a woman. But friends tell me that my approach to courtship scares women off. I'm tired of fouling things up and making myself lonely. Yet, when a lady friend of mine suggested I spend a night out with her where she would act as my wingman, I recoiled. Prowling for random women in a bar doesn't fit my sense of romance.

Should I consider counseling to try to tame my personality?

Wild Horses Drag Me Away

It would help to know, WHDMA, what exactly you're doing—besides being all intensely romantic and extremely idealistic and physically fit and stuff—that scares women off. Without that info, it's difficult to advise you.

But I can do a little decoding for you: When friends say "your personality is intense," what they typically mean is "you are an asshole."

Assholes who have friends sometimes conclude that there must be something wrong with all the women and/or men on the planet because, hey, I've got friends—and if my friends can stand me, why couldn't my ex-girlfriend(s)? But friending, if I may borrow Facebook's proprietary verb, an asshole is easy; dating an asshole is hard. (Or that's what my boyfriend tells me, anyway.)

A friendship involves a smaller time commitment; a girlfriend is required to spend much more time with you. Not only that, WHDMA, but a person with an asshole friend is regarded as perhaps too tolerant, while a person with an asshole boyfriend is viewed as having a character flaw. Or several: lousy taste, the wrong kind of masochistic streak, low self-esteem, etc.

So, yeah, you should consider counseling to "tame your personality." Your alleged virtues—extremely intense! Extremely romantic! Extremely idealistic!—may not themselves be the problem. But if the people living outside your skull have identified them as impediments to your professed romantic goals, WHDMA, then there's something problematic about the way you're expressing them.

And that lady friend who offered to take you out and act as your wingman? I suspect she was trying to pull the stick out of your ass and trying to get you to see that dating—at least at the outset—is about pleasure, not intensity. I assure you that bars all over the civilized world are packed with "random women" as interested in intense and consuming love affairs as you are. Give fun a chance.

I thought I knew what teabagging meant: to dip a man's testicles in and out of your mouth. But during a recent conversation about the Republican teabagging craze, my boyfriend told me that teabagging meant to put your balls into someone else's mouth. A person without balls, he insists, can't do the teabagging. But many women I know think they are the teabagger and their partner is the one being teabagged. So, Dan, I'm asking you—as an expert on all things political and sexual—do hetero females have a chance of teabagging President Obama? Don't get me wrong: I want to teabag the president for all the right reasons. I'm a supporter. I just want in on any activity that involves Obama's balls in my mouth.

The Earnest Aspirant

Let's say you were in the West Wing with Barack Obama's sack resting comfortably in your mouth. Perhaps you had done something meritorious—defeated the Somalian pirates, sworn in Senator Al Franken—and you were being awarded the Presidential Wattle of Freedom. The New York Times might report, "The president of the United States and a Savage Love reader were spotted 'teabagging' in the Oval Office today."

But while you can teabag with the president, TEA, you don't have what it takes to administer a teabagging to the president. A teabagger dips sack; a teabaggee receives dipped sack. It's a little confusing, I realize, in that it's the opposite of a blowjob: The person with a dick in his or her mouth is giving the blowjob; the person being sucked is receiving the blowjob. But language is funny that way.

A long time ago I experienced, late one nite, roasted, drunk, blah, blah, blah!!! This brother picked me up and drove me to his place and screwed me good. He said I was hot!!! I really liked it, had an anal orgasm!!! It was indescribable. I loved it!!! He gave me his number. But I was too shy to call back. Never saw him again. So I bought dildos and proceeded to fuck myself and get drunk or high (weed) every night!!! What does that make me? Closet drunk? Closet English cigarette? I like pussy, too! Whatzup?!

Anonymously Me

I don't have the faintest idea!!!

My boyfriend refuses to have any kind of intercourse with me while my Aunt Flo is visiting. I'm not asking to have sex when I'm on my heavy days, just at the beginning and tail end of my period. He says it's disgusting, even if he wears a condom, and that it makes his stomach turn to even think about it. I find this terribly frustrating because my period lasts a good 10 days (according to his definition), and I have to go without any loving the whole time. And yet he expects me to blow him on a regular basis during that time. I love him, and I'd rather not DTMFA over this. What can I do?

Aunt Flo Terminates Erection Return

Only blow him on days when he hasn't used his penis to urinate.

Because really, AFTER, how can he ask you to suck cock on days when pee comes out of his thing? That's just as disgusting—it's more disgusting—than a little bit of blood on the condom. And any guy who can't handle a little bit of blood shouldn't be asking his girlfriend to ingest whatever trace amounts of urine might be lurking in his urethra. But if he wants you to blow him—to keep him content during your period—then he needs to find a way to do the same for you. If he can't bring himself to fuck you during your period, AFTER, then at the very least he can help you get off with a vibrator, or engage in outercourse or mutual masturbation with you, or eat your pussy through a wad of Saran Wrap.

If he won't do any of that, reconsider DTMFA.

ATTENTION HUMP! FILMMAKERS: The Stranger is proud to announce HUMP! 5, the Pacific Northwest's biggest, best, and only amateur (and locally produced) porn festival. HUMP! 5 goes down October 9–10 at On the Boards. The deadline for HUMP! 5 submissions is September 21.

BIG NEWS: The max length for HUMP! submissions this year is five minutes. We don't want to be total assholes about this, so... if you feel your film is brilliant at 6:15 and harmed at 5:00, you are welcome to submit two versions of your film, i.e., a five-minute cut and a longer cut. But you must submit both cuts. If the HUMP! jury agrees that the longer version is superior, an exception may be made.

CASH PRIZES: HUMP! isn't just about love and sex and laughs. HUMP! is also about cash prizes. There are two award categories in HUMP!—Humor and Hottest—and a $2,000 first-place prize is awarded in both categories. There's also a $500 second-place prize and a $250 third-place prize in both categories.

EXTRA CREDIT! We ask HUMP! filmmakers to use certain props and to shoot at certain locations so that audiences will know when they're watching something made just for HUMP! This year's extra-credit props: a pink slip (layoff or undergarment), the Book of Mormon, motorcycle boots, an ErosTek e-stim unit, Aplets & Cotlets. This year's extra-credit locations: the SLUT, the P-I globe, the Statue of Liberty at Alki Beach, the giant mitt outside Safeco Field.

THE JURY WOULD LIKE TO SEE: fem-domme, CFNM, pegging. Including these themes won't get your film into HUMP! automatically, but it will give you a leg up. We've seen lots of tied up and/or submissive women over the last couple of years—not that there's anything wrong with that—and this year the HUMP! jury wants to see some women on top.

NEW TO HUMP!? We do our best to make HUMP! safe, fun, and anonymous. People make films and give them to us; we make only two screening copies and return the originals. Our only copies are destroyed onstage after the last screening. HUMP! lets you be a porn star for a weekend—not for life! And HUMP! films do not have to be hardcore. Animation, horny salt shakers, and sexy, nonexplicit shorts have all been featured at HUMP!

GET GOING! Last year we heard from several people who didn't start shooting their films until a few days before the submission deadline, and we weren't able to include their late entries. Don't procrastinate! There's no reason you can't start making your film now. It's going to be a lovely weekend—make some porn!

ALL THE INFO: thestranger.com/hump.

mail@savagelove.net

This story has been updated since it was originally published.

 

Comments (141) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Whew....now that I have been first, I must say that I was a bit disappointed that the porn-promotion at the end of the column cut into the regular format. Come on. Give us our fix of amusing/enlightening advice.
Posted by clembot on April 21, 2009 at 9:12 PM · Report
2
first comment? Also, are there no conditions to this year's entries, (like last year having to include a jack-o-lantern somewhere?)
protected,
- Makenna
Posted by Makenna on April 21, 2009 at 9:18 PM · Report
3
Damn. I need to be quicker on the draw. The question still stands, though. I need to know if my entry needs a weird theme or a funny 'easter egg' somewhere.
Posted by Makenna on April 21, 2009 at 9:20 PM · Report
4
Come on Dan!! All week to come up with one lousy response to one question? Is this why you make the big bucks?
Posted by Tom Waite on April 21, 2009 at 9:29 PM · Report
5
aww i'd been looking forward to this all week. cop-out column.
Posted by le sigh on April 21, 2009 at 9:56 PM · Report
6
In m experience, guys who peg themselves as 'romantic' or 'old-fashioned' have sexist leanings and outdated ideas about women's sexuality. They're going to woo you like a 19th century literary hero and you're going to like it, dammit!
Posted by Kiki on April 21, 2009 at 9:57 PM · Report
7
i've never understood people who approach dating as some chore to be enthusiastically completed. its supposed to be fun right? and if you're not having fun then something needs to change. also, c'mon people, "first comment!" are you proud of yourselves? how about some substance. and yeah, there should always be at least 3 questions that are answered with only the amusing poignant wit that dan savage can provide.
Posted by zorro83 on April 21, 2009 at 9:57 PM · Report
8
I march to the beat of my own drum.

This could be a euphemism for 'weirdo'.

Friends tell me that my personality is intense.

This is definitely a euphemism for 'weirdo', or at least difficult to get along with (I think 'asshole' may be a bit extreme, but also possible.)

I'm extremely idealistic, and I count myself as a romantic. I'm interested in an intense and consuming love affair with a woman.

I'm a young single woman and your letter alone is setting off all kinds of warning bells. You need to get a woman to like and trust you before you can get into an intense and consuming love affair. If you are giving off weird, overly intense or obsessive/desperate vibes, women will read this as creepy and avoid you, no matter how good you look (remember Ted Bundy was fit and attractive too.) I think counseling is probably a good idea, to figure out why your personality is so extreme and what in your past may have put you in this position. You deserve love like everyone does, but I think it will elude you when you're looking *so* hard.

(And there's nothing wrong with not liking the bar scene, Dan! I was a bartender for several years and saw very few people find "love" - although I did see plenty of injuries, regretful one night stands and a few date rape attempts.)
Posted by spinal on April 21, 2009 at 9:59 PM · Report
9
You should never date someone who calls himself a romantic. He won't treat you like a real person, but like a prop in his romantic fantasy.
Posted by Not a romantic on April 21, 2009 at 10:08 PM · Report
10
Regarding the intense SWM:

Speaking from experience, the "intense and consuming" approach can raise red flags in the minds of many women as warnings of a potentially abusive partner. Even if this SWM is not and would never be abusive, the ladies he courts (and their friends) might interpret his behavior as a precursor to increasingly controlling, isolating, manipulative and abusive behavior.

While a therapist may be a bit extreme, he should probably reexamine his ideas about the kind of relationship he desires - and take the advice of his friends in a more relaxed approach to "courtship."
Posted by Oh Suzanna on April 21, 2009 at 10:10 PM · Report
11
Sorry, spinal's post came up while I was writing mine. Didn't mean to repeat already covered material.
Posted by Oh Suzanna on April 21, 2009 at 10:14 PM · Report
12
Hehe... guys who peg themselves...
Posted by L on April 21, 2009 at 10:42 PM · Report
13
I've also had people tell me that it's the person with the balls that is necessarily the teabagger, but that's never made any sense to me, because, in my experience, the person with the balls is the passive party. It's the person doing the actual mouth action that is actually performing the act. If a guys balls are in my mouth, it's because I put them there. It's always sounded more correct to me to refer to myself as teabagging the guy.
Posted by Laya on April 21, 2009 at 11:16 PM · Report
14
Dan got it exactly backwards... "intense" is usually code for "not enough of an asshole". On a scale from "creepy stalker" to "asshole frat boy", "intense" is way closer to the creepy stalker. Like a lot of us guys trying to figure out the dating scene, WHDMA needs to learn to lighten up, not care so much, have more fun, and be less emotional.
Posted by J on April 21, 2009 at 11:17 PM · Report
15
Another strange language quirk: in dick-in-mouth sex, the person with the dick is "receiving" a blowjob, but in dick-in-ass sex, the person with the dick is "giving" and the person with the ass is "receiving" anal.
Posted by J on April 21, 2009 at 11:19 PM · Report
16
Also, I agree with Kiki and Spinal and I am also a young, single woman. There's nothing wrong with a man being intense and romantic but those qualities have to emerge organically in their own time as a relationship develops. When a guy uses those terms to describe himself, I definitely get a needy and obsessive vibe. Also guys like that tend to put women on pedestals instead of seeing them as real people.
Posted by Laya on April 21, 2009 at 11:24 PM · Report
17
not first!

i love the idea of being a porn star for the weekend. just one clarification, must all the props be in one movie?
Posted by mpls crasher on April 22, 2009 at 12:39 AM · Report
18
...and it was disappointing to only read two letters. humph.
Posted by mpls crasher on April 22, 2009 at 12:40 AM · Report
19
First, WHDMA's letter makes him sound not only like an asshole, but like a CREEPY asshole.

Secondly, you dip a tea bag INTO a cup of hot water, much like someone dips their balls into a willing mouth. Thusly, a man teabags someone, he is not teabagged. If he is not an active participant of the teabagging, i.e. he did not put them in your mouth, you just moved to his balls from his cock, then you are not participating in teabagging, you are just licking balls. Either way, good times had all around, am I right?
Posted by Teabagged Laura on April 22, 2009 at 1:16 AM · Report
20
Dan, why did the the third, very short letter make the cut for the Onion/A.V. Club version of the column, but not the Stranger version?
Posted by UnoriginalAndrew on April 22, 2009 at 1:24 AM · Report
21
"Teabagging" also means to touch your sack onto something (that something being, 99% of the time, someone else's head). This was memorably demonstrated in the John Waters' movie "Pecker", where one character lowered his balls onto another's forehead. Teabagging also possible in many current multiplayer videogames (eg: "Halo 3"). When a player falls down dead, another player stands above him and kneels, simulating a teabagging.
Posted by TMan on April 22, 2009 at 4:06 AM · Report
22
"very attractive, very fit SWM living in NYC. I'm well-read and well-spoken."

A guy with this inflated an ego is probably not meeting women because he comes off as an arrogant douche!

"march to the beat of my own drum" = i disagree with people a lot

"intense" = impossible to be around
Posted by dance to the beat of many drums on April 22, 2009 at 4:15 AM · Report
23
I recommend that WHDMA take introductory improv workshops. The rules of improv are the same rules as positive communication. Learn the rules, think about the rules, apply the rules.
Posted by Writer on April 22, 2009 at 4:44 AM · Report
24
I agree with the single ladies on this board -- nothing is worse than being a symbol to a dude and not a person. In fact, it's one of my points in my dating manifesto, "Things Nice Guys Can Learn From Assholes".
Posted by singingcynic on April 22, 2009 at 5:43 AM · Report
25
Regarding the first letter: there is something enticing about an attractive person who doesn't know they're attractive (or at least pretends not to know). Maybe this person should pretend he doesn't know he's such a catch and maybe his luck will change.
Posted by drew on April 22, 2009 at 5:56 AM · Report
26
@Teabagged Laura: Exactly. It's in the wording. Let's just look to actual teabags and it all makes sense. You dip teabags. Nobody puts them in their mouth and sucks them. I hope.
Posted by Gloria on April 22, 2009 at 7:04 AM · Report
27
I'll say why "Wild Horses" is having a hard time forming an "intense" relationship with a woman: he's much too in love with himself. I bet he goes on and on about his feelings and his views, and doesn't realize that dating is about more than finding someone to adore him. He needs to temper his ego if he wants to stop scaring women away.
Posted by Tired of the Self-involved on April 22, 2009 at 7:06 AM · Report
28
Oh, yeah, and "Wild Horses": women don't generally want to date men who are more emotional than they are.
Posted by Tired of the Self-involved on April 22, 2009 at 7:10 AM · Report
29
savage love was better when it was a sex-and-relationships advice column...
Posted by David Byrne on April 22, 2009 at 7:17 AM · Report
30
The Onion AV Club leaves out all of the Hump nonsense, and includes more sex advice:

http://www.avclub.com/articles/april-22-…

"Wild Horses" sounds narcissistic. When he goes on a date, I bet he talks on and on about his views and his feelings. I wonder how long it'll take him to figure out that most women aren't interested in dating men who are more emotional then they are.
Posted by My Name Here on April 22, 2009 at 7:23 AM · Report
31
I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who waits for this all week. :) But yeah, it's a little disappointing to only have two questions answered.
Posted by kara on April 22, 2009 at 7:38 AM · Report
32
Who the hell "recoils" when a female friend offers to go out with you to a bar and help you get laid?

My impression is this guy is a self absorbed douche bag without a sense of humor covering up deep insecurities with posturing. Yay run on sentence!
Posted by cmnkisrule on April 22, 2009 at 7:43 AM · Report
33
A guy can peg himself now? Hold on, I need to amend a Wikipedia article...
Posted by Rob on April 22, 2009 at 7:47 AM · Report
34
TY DAN!! I used to be friends with a woman who *could not comprehend* that my relationship (sexual) was different than her platonic relationship with the same guy. Her conclusion was that because he had tons of friends he must therefore be a great guy and not the POS womanizer I remembered him being. TY TY TY!! for actually putting this no-brainer in writing.
Posted by violet on April 22, 2009 at 8:09 AM · Report
35
WHDMA,
When folks refer to someone as "too intense" it typically means that they never shut up, and/or that they and talk too much about him or herself. i think rather than therapy, ask a friend that you trust, or better yet, someone that you don't get along with, what might be the problem with your personality. ask someone that can't stand you! that is one way to get an honest answer.
Posted by kim1of2 on April 22, 2009 at 8:15 AM · Report
36
Disappointed that there were only 2 questions. Like many others commented, I love me some Dan Savage, and this week's column is a tease.

I'm thinking therapy is definitely the answer for the first guy. Friends won't tell you what they really think. Girlfriends probably let this guy down easy, because if he's really as intense as he says he is, then they're probably afraid to be honest. What I'm hearing about this guy is not so much stalker, more like inexperienced in relationships and unrealistic, overly romantic expectations.

Posted by tea cup on April 22, 2009 at 8:30 AM · Report
37
Than again, if you haven't gotten laid for months, who wouldn't be a little "intense?"

Besides, what's so wrong with wanting to fall madly and passionately in love with someone else? Or wanting to be the type of person whom someone else falls passionately and madly in love with?

I don't know what the LW's problem and/or hurdles might be but maybe we should cut him some slack.
Posted by britwrit on April 22, 2009 at 8:35 AM · Report
38
Well, I am off to defeat the Somali pirates!!!
Posted by GCP on April 22, 2009 at 8:43 AM · Report
39
Translations for 'wild horses':

"intense personality": exhausting to be around, due to being too vocal with one's opinions, too stubborn, or both. Can also be a code word for being high-maintenance and fussy.

"romantic": can be a positive trait in a partner, but the self-labeled romantics are often a pain in the ass. Romantic tendencies/personalities should emerge naturally as part of getting to know someone.

"march to the beat of my own drum": by itself, not necessarily a bad thing. When connected to all the aforementioned qualities, could easily be connected to the stubbornness that goes with being 'intense'.

Overall, the guy sounds a bit humorless and high-maintenance. If he'd said what his typical courtship is like, it would be easier to tell what he needs to do. Talking to a counselor and accepting honest, loving feedback from friends will probably help. After all, sometimes it's your friends' job to tell you you're being an ass.
Posted by karen on April 22, 2009 at 8:54 AM · Report
40
dearest dan,
as a confirmed asshole (on the mend, thanks to couples therapy) I would like to thank you so much for your no-nonsense response to WHDMA...I for one know that often what an "intense" personality CRAVES is someone to give it to them straight (no puns or double-entendre intended).
Props to WHDMA for writing in, props to you, the King of the Straight Answer.
good luck, WHDMA - take it like a man!

HAHAHAHAHAHA....
Posted by j'lo... on April 22, 2009 at 9:00 AM · Report
41
To see the full version of this column sans the HUMP 5 advert, go here:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/april-22-…
Posted by sophia on April 22, 2009 at 9:11 AM · Report
42
Hi Dan,

It sounds like the guy in the first letter has undiagnosed Asperger's or something along the Autism spectrum. It's VERY different from being an asshole, but it does require the people in their lives to be able to yell, "Hey, Calm Down, Refocus!!" until they do. That's not something you can really do on a first date with a guy.

People with Asperger's tend to be really intense about things that are important to them, but they're often genuinely sweet and good-natured about their interests. (Though, like every other population, some really are assholes, of course.)

Maybe something a trained psychologist could detect?
Posted by thali hipp on April 22, 2009 at 9:13 AM · Report
43
Me, Obama, teabagging? Can somebody say "hot, hot, hot" ?
Posted by Obamaphile on April 22, 2009 at 9:25 AM · Report
44
WHDMA may be an asshole, Dan, but he sounds to me more like a creeper. If a man is willing to email you and tell you that he is "idealistic" and "romantic"...not to mention wants a "consuming love affair" with a woman...he probably tells every potential woman he meets that exact same line within 15 minutes of meeting her. His problem is probably coming on too strong and making every woman so suffocated by his bullshit of how he is the dreamy, poetic-type she can't stand him.
Posted by Kat on April 22, 2009 at 9:36 AM · Report
45
"First" comments are soooo elementary school. you're the asshole who had to rush to the front of every line. grow up. i hate you.
great advice to Wild Horses guy. he should totally take up the offer of a wing-lady, she will let him know what he's doing wrong and give him some ideas on how not to be an asshole.
Posted by ribs on April 22, 2009 at 9:52 AM · Report
46
No, you don't ask someone who can't stand you their opinion, as you won't get an honest answer. You ask someone who either gives it to you straight or has insufficient emotional investment to worry about offending you.

The guy's problem here isn't that he's an asshole - it's that he's too hard work and not as handsome as he thinks he is. If he was drop dead gorgeous, women would put up with his shit and shag him.

Most people don't want to work hard in a relationship, so when you mean someone who 'marches to the beat of their own drum' (read : approaches life differently from everyone else) there's straight away extra work.

Then there's 'intense' which most definitely means 'expects too much, too soon'

Add in 'idealistic' and 'romantic' - for that read 'unrealistic expectations' and probably 'picky'.

He's probably insecure, too, although that's difficult to be sure about.

To be incredibly sexist, some women can get away with this sort of crap (in the short term, at least), because they're usually more in demand in straight relationships. Men can't unless there's great sexual chemistry.

Dan's advice is pretty good though, dating *should* be a pleasure provided no games are played (which, sadly, they often are...). I definitely don't see the problem with being upset at searching for people in bars though - going out with the express aim of getting laid, rather than as a side effect of an activity/event you want to do, is a very sad existence.
Posted by PersonInUK on April 22, 2009 at 9:53 AM · Report
47
No Dan, you were off on your first assessment. I have the same intensity problem. And it's not assholery, it's that god damn romantic comedy imagination out on a limb, that in the movies, get's you laid, but in the real world SCARES THE SHIT out of women. Not necessarily stalking, but out of the blue saying let's go to the bahamas, james bond chivalry etc. etc.

Sadly, all those great ideas of things you want to do and those romantic escapades are still good ideas, but there is a certain TRUST element that has to happen before you can reach that point. And if you want to build that trust, you have to put up with the trite convo and senseless unsensual banging to get that point.

In the meantime Dan almost kind of redeemed himself in the last part about dating being about pleasure and not intensity.

As for the wingman, the girl wants to do his friend a favor to get his friend layed SO HE WILL CALM THE FUCK DOWN. And in the meantime, she isn't offering her services because she is afraid to loser her identity and get attached to romantic dead weight. Women have intimacy/comitment issues too of a different sort.
Posted by intense nonasshole on April 22, 2009 at 10:07 AM · Report
48
The whole "intense=asshole" equation needs explaining. Some people really are intense, and while being with them is not painful, it is like drinking from a fire hose. I have one friend in particular that I'd never ever date for exactly this reason!

He's now happily married BTW and has calmed down considerably.

Not all intense people are egotistical, narcissistic, obtuse assholes who are completely oblivious to the reactions of those around them. Some of them are truly intense people, driven by their own creative impulses, and are completely oblivious to the reactions of those around them.

I realize this is a total oxy moron! Or something. Whether or not an intense person is an asshole really depends on their peripheral qualities and whether or not I perceive them to be caring underneath - do they help their friends, do they make amends when necessary, do they pay their debts, do they seem truly aware of their own foibles and are they making a sincere and constant effort to manage them, etc.

In fact, whether or not anyone's an asshole, regardless of their intensity, might depend on the above.
Posted by 484 on April 22, 2009 at 10:15 AM · Report
49
WHDMA is creepy. Any guy who said even half of what this guy spilled in his letter to Dan would have me running the other way. And you can't even have a beer with a woman in a bar because it's not "romantic" enough? Maybe no women want to be around you because your expectations are completely unrealistic: a guy who thinks going for a beer is not an option because it isn't romantic enough is probably also the kind of guy who thinks you roll out of bed looking beautiful, and will be shattered when you don't. Women are real people, and we're not waiting around like distressed damsels for you to sweep us off our feet into a "consuming love affair." Barf.
Posted by TeaHag on April 22, 2009 at 12:49 PM · Report
50
Fun Bj Fact blow job is a prostitute term from the twenties. Job being slang for an illegal activity. (bank job, etc) She is the recipient of the "Blow" meaning cum. Although men can blow in any hole in the mouth is the slimiest.
Posted by merl haggert on April 22, 2009 at 12:49 PM · Report
51
quoth Kiki: "In m experience, guys who peg themselves as 'romantic' or 'old-fashioned' have sexist leanings and outdated ideas about women's sexuality. They're going to woo you like a 19th century literary hero and you're going to like it, dammit!"

this was once me, and is spot on. I didn't used to get many dates, and my more "romantic" friends continue to fail at getting dates (while rejecting the idea of a "meaningless" "fling"). I'm in a happy open LTR now and capable of getting many dates. now more honest with myself in introspection (step 1? rooting out that pesky implicit misogyny thing...), he needs to ask himself what's worse: having a few personality flaws, or being COMPLETELY oblivious--and therefore powerless to compensate for them?

I'm still an asshole though--in balance it can be an asset.
Posted by stew on April 22, 2009 at 1:12 PM · Report
52
Wow, Wild Horses sounds like my ex, who used words like "thrice" and "henceforth" and also had big mommy issues; and will probably be found dead at age 40 in somebody's dungeon (if not his parents' basement), dressed in a diaper. Tip #1: if you want to get a girl, don't talk like an escaped romance novel character.
Posted by Cheezy on April 22, 2009 at 2:12 PM · Report
53
I posit that, as with hand-clapping games, pub songs, and other regionally developed means of communication, the definition of "teabagging" varies depending on where you are. Before this tax day silliness, I was only familiar with the definition that involved the sack being applied, in the manner of Head On, directly to the forehead. Watch John Waters' movie "Pecker" for this definition in use.
Posted by lilzilla on April 22, 2009 at 2:30 PM · Report
54
Kiki--like teabagging, pegging can be done to someone, but not to oneself. But if you can do it to someone romantically, Danny Boy might give you credit for that.
Posted by Sneaky Kiki on April 22, 2009 at 2:41 PM · Report
55
Not sure I agree with the advice for WHDMA he may not be an asshole, he could just be taking it too seriously. Few people want to be on a first date with someone who's acting like they're about to marry you. Just chill out dude. You can date women you're not going to marry. Just go out and have some fun dates. One of them will work out eventually and turn into more dates. One of those, if you're really lucky, may last a lifetime, but take it one step at a time.
Posted by Colin on April 22, 2009 at 2:50 PM · Report
56
I fear that one man's "intense" is another woman's creepy, and indicative of future stalker behavior. I mean, a guy who comes across all intense in the beginning can seem at best desperate, and at worst like he may end up passing lotion down to you in a bucket.
And intense relationships are like mind-blowing s3ex. They're more rare than they should be, and they can't be achieved just by requesting them.
Posted by charlie on April 22, 2009 at 3:03 PM · Report
57
Exactly, everyone here more or less gets it but Dan. Intense is not necessarily asshole, intense is perceived as creepy, obsessive, etc. etc. Right or wrong, the guy will come across as having a lot of baggage even if his intentions are genuine and good.

Sometimes I marvel at HORRIBLY WRONG men and women sometimes read each other.

He just needs to chill out, and yes getting laid does help. If the guy truely is intense and NOT an asshole, he will most likely need an intense woman to play with. Intense women however, can chew through men like toilet paper and are turned off by desperation like a flash light in a black hole. He's in New York, he needs to shut up, let his good looks do the talking and sleep with some people. I would imagine that for this guy, the sex is going to come before the trust, and that in turn will bring out the good relationship.

Don't lower your physical standards too much. GET LAID! Keep it as superficial as possible. Parties are better than bars.
Posted by former tri-state on April 22, 2009 at 3:21 PM · Report
58
I think Wild Horses is my brother. And if that is the case then he is no stalker. The best advice on here is of the "have fun" sentiment. Most of the comments here have sure made a ton of assumptions - that letter doesn't have that much information. It's really general and not very personal at all. I realize I am saying this while making my own assumption. But really so many of you have jumped to some weird conclusions. I realize most commenters aren't actually trying to give advice here. People like to be anonymously mean - anyone can make that generalization by reading comments on just about any website. At least when Dan is an asshole he usually gives good advice. HAVE FUN WILD HORSES! HAVE SO MUCH FUN! LIFE IS SHORT! and if you are my brother: YOU ARE WONDERFUL!
Posted by kittenchops on April 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM · Report
59
When friends say "your personality is intense," what they typically mean is...you're obsessive and clingy and consequently scare women away.
Posted by lettuce on April 22, 2009 at 4:06 PM · Report
60
but lettuce, would you say the best cure for obsessive and clingy behavior without being all demeaning about it, is to have nonclingy and nonobsessive sex?

Why do you have to be all hating? What he really needs is someone to spell it out for him ...

1) Get drunk
2) Have a nonexistential non heavy emotional conversation.
3) Have sex
4) Accept that they may or may not call each other back

uhm ...

4) yeah it was a lot of fun, but guess what at the end of the day you are a guy just like all the others.

Repeat as long as necesary and one way or another it will work itself out.

It would most certainly ground everyone's expectations
Posted by former tri-state on April 22, 2009 at 4:36 PM · Report
61
I'm a self-descibed romantic guy and I feel the need to defend that characterization, which WHDMA is clearly not helping with. While I have no problem meeting women and enjoy dating, the thing I live for is having an "intense and consuming love affair". But, judging by the urge to punch myself in the face after writing "intense and consuming love affair", I think the problem here is the presentation (in addition to some other character flaws).

For example, I just spent a lovely weekend in Madrid with a girl I've known for a couple of months. We were talking about some expectations in our developing relationship, but instead of using words like "intense" and "consuming", I just told her how much I enjoy the honeymoon phase of dating - that period in a relationship where you just want to spend all of your time in bed together. Not only did she not visibly cring, I actually got a laugh out of her.

My advice to WHDMA - from one romantic to another - is not to take yourself, or your expectations, so seriously. And don't try for anything more than some good conversation and laughs when you first meet a girl. Either that or kidnap her and take her to a charming city in Europe. Good luck man.
Posted by Don Juan de Madrid on April 22, 2009 at 4:40 PM · Report
62
I agree with intense nonasshole. I'm not that intense, but in lots of ways this guy sounds like me - I've definitely given a 'desperate' vibe even when I wasn't actually being desperate.

I'd say it's due to expecting too much too soon, and having high expectations. Doesn't help that I am a pretty unusual person. All of this has limited the involvements I've had over the last several years.

I have a girlfriend now, mainly as a result of lightening up, not taking it so seriously, not being so damn stuck on a certain way of meeting someone (like WHDMA avoiding bars).

Idealism is probably his enemy.
Posted by hexalm on April 22, 2009 at 5:15 PM · Report
63
i disagree with "Not a romantic".

Some of us who consider ourselves to be romantics want equal pleasure for our mates AND ourselves.
Posted by emmtee03 on April 22, 2009 at 5:47 PM · Report
64
'I'm interested in an intense and consuming love affair with a woman.'

See, that right there is a turn-off, even to women who consider themselves romantic. It's not a personality trait, really, it's something he wants. Something he's likely planned in his head, based on scenes from novels and Jon Cusack movies. He's just looking for someone to slot into the (likely underdeveloped, one-dimensional) leading lady role, Romantic Conquest #1, someone who will follow his direction. He might try to force them into a role that doesn't suit them, or fire them if they stray from the script.
Posted by Kiki on April 22, 2009 at 5:52 PM · Report
65
Dan: "But I can do a little decoding for you: When friends say "your personality is intense," what they typically mean is "you are an asshole.""

Sometimes, yes. But I'm not so sure about typically. This reminds me of a word women frequently use to describe themselves: sassy. I've met sassy women where the sassy was bitchy (bad), but others where the sassy was more smartassy (good!), so I couldn't say sassy was usually code for bitchy.
__________________________________

PersonInUK: "The guy's problem here isn't that he's an asshole - it's that he's too hard work and not as handsome as he thinks he is. If he was drop dead gorgeous, women would put up with his shit and shag him.

I have to agree. Not every woman is going to want to fuck a "very attractive, very fit" guy who is (for the sake of argument) a jerk, but some women certainly would. Hot guys who are assholes get laid much more than non-assholes who aren't hot.

"To be incredibly sexist, some women can get away with this sort of crap (in the short term, at least), because they're usually more in demand in straight relationships. Men can't unless there's great sexual chemistry."

That's not sexist. That's reality. While some women will put up with shit from a guy if he's hot in order to fuck him, a LOT of men will put up with a LOT of shit from a hot woman just to fuck her. As you alluded to, it's all about supply and demand. Women are far more in demand sexually by men than men are by women so women can get away with a lot more shit and still get laid.

Posted by JD on April 22, 2009 at 6:56 PM · Report
66
Let's keep these comments concise. I sense that someone is going to the gym in 26 minutes.
Posted by Chaon on April 22, 2009 at 7:26 PM · Report
67
I actually dated a guy who described himself as "intense & romantic." He treated me like a delicate little flower, tried to keep track of me all the time, and was so "intense" that when I broke up with him, he stalked me--but only because of his "intense" neeeeeed to be near me. It was my fault. I made him follow me around by being so unromantic! Men like this are deeply unhealthy people, and SHOULD BE romantically avoided.
Posted by justme on April 22, 2009 at 8:18 PM · Report
68
There are so many people longing for a love that belongs on the big screen. Trouble is they are not spontaneous or truly open. As soon as they meet someone who passes the initial "screening" they spend all their time asking is "she the one?" Will she be stepping into the jumpsuit of my fantasy?
Besides he sounds too in love with himself to give lesser mortals a shot at his prime. Too bad.
Posted by pieceofmind on April 22, 2009 at 8:47 PM · Report
69
eh - my whole family is "intense" and "marches to the beat of our own drums", each of us respectively to a a different drum. It's a bit much for most people, but . . . I'm in a wonderful, loving, satisfying relationship with my exact opposite. He gets intensity and excitement with me and I get stability, sympathy when I've had an 'intense' day, as well as someone who'll say "if it makes you happy" to my next crazy proposal. Our friends actually had bets, real money-exchanging bets, that we wouldn't last and we're together after their relationships have mostly died out.

The issue is thinking that things (like chemistry or a complete understanding of a person) appear in a day, or that only two intense people work together, or writing off anyone you meet in a bar.

My theory is that TV teaches people to be perfectly 'involved seeming' without actually being involved - friendly but not a true friend, excited but not intense. It teaches people that there's a 2-inch strip that is acceptable behavior; anything else is 'weird', 'intense', strange, not normal. According to this theory, anything else should be constrained and destroyed, removed from a person's personality.

People in the US seem to mistake 'normal' behavior for proper, well-mannered, or appropriate behavior; generally it is none of those things. It's amazing how people believe it is 'normal' to call someone a 'weirdo' because they don't act like everyone else (and know it).

Keep in mind 10 or 15 years ago, this site would have been considered only for "weirdos"! As each group becomes more mainstream (believing itself to be immune from judging others as harshly as they themselves have been judged), the group will try to convince others to change themselves, to fit into the 'norms' of behavior. I don't contest that being told to change from gay to straight would be horribly difficult, but I do present that being told to "be less intense" or "mellow out" is even more damaging - there are no "intense people of the world" pride clubs; personalities are generally very fixed for aspects such as this; and our society is no more accepting (see comments above) of intensity and abnormality in personalities than it is of alternative lifestyles. I would make the case that it is even less accepting, in general, of people because people feel they can just say "oh, just change yourself so you fit in better" or "because most people aren't like that", even people that should be assumed to be a bit more enlightened than that!
More...
Posted by tess on April 22, 2009 at 8:50 PM · Report
70
WHDMA may have read a few too many Jane Austen novels, but I do not see the "red flags" of abuse nor do I see any evidence of him being an asshole. I do see pretension, quixotism, and troubling idealism, which may not be the best combination when seeking a mate (or advice )in a postmodern society.
Posted by amy on April 22, 2009 at 10:56 PM · Report
71
Like a few others here, I identify as an "intense" man- and I really think that no euphemisms apply in my case (and I have discussed it with reasonably dispassionate- - direct at the least- friends)- I'm just intense.

I've never stalked before. I've let go of women many times, and haven't fallen for many.

However, I do like honesty- and intensely (intentional word use there) dislike mind games played by some women. To this end I am direct, and I don't think unduly, although my friends have had quibbles here and there. I have a fairly large vocabulary that I like to use. I am interested in lots of scholarly subjects and like to discuss them- sometimes to the point that one might think I'm orgasming on them. I always look people in the eye, but mind my own business and try to give people space in public.

I certainly have a sense of humour.

Yeah, I could lighten up on the vocabulary. I could avoid eye contact, or I could let mind games be played on me, and women play passive aggressive, but I'd rather show them how willing I am NOT to stalk them.

Maybe it's the ongoing stereotype that men are not or ought not to be as overtly intelligent and/or deeply conversational as women, or as direct, or sensitive, or just INTENSE (no euphemism), but being as I am does not make me creepy or a stalker. I just doesn't necessarily follow, like many of the euphemisms confidently suggested in this thread.

Maybe, collectively we have become a little too wed to conventional portrayals of "intensity" in the media and movies, or something along those lines.
Posted by Intense, with Marbles Intact on April 22, 2009 at 11:23 PM · Report
72
tess,

I fully agree with your comment having fully read it now.

With regards to Dan's diagnosis, I think he completely misinterpreted "intense" in this setting.

I would not think that I would labeled an "asshole" by anyone, and I think that I am "intense" in a similar regard to WHDMA. i am not socially backward or perverse, or unpleasant. I am certainly intellectually forward, as well as emotionally forward like WHDMA, but of course still rational.

I merely appear to have an sex life made from intellectual conversation... unusual I know, but it's really nothing more alarming than that.

I've had conversations before of startling depth with women, even those I've just met. They're out there.

For women, or men, that read my two comments so far and read "alarm bells" into them, I freely invite you to, but I must point out that the alarms are ringing in your head only, that you can't know that you are right, and that I would challenge you to know where your notions come from, from media absorption or personal observation, and whether they are logical and reasonable, or merely emotional.
Posted by Intense, with Marbles Intact on April 22, 2009 at 11:42 PM · Report
73
"extremely idealistic" sounds like he's looking for the "perfect" woman and no real woman would fit this ideal, nor want to, which is what turns them off.
Posted by sf gal on April 22, 2009 at 11:51 PM · Report
74
As a hetro woman I read WHDMA and thought, "Dwight from The Office" perhaps?
Posted by Sbart on April 23, 2009 at 4:08 AM · Report
75
The whole teabagging Q & A = hilarious + informative! Thanks! lol
Posted by kristinbell on April 23, 2009 at 4:44 AM · Report
76
WHDMA is totally my former roommate. While he might not actually be the same person, they have really similar characteristics, at least self-admittedly.

P——— was definitely intense; he had one of the most manic personalities I've ever encountered (I remember helping him reupholster furniture at 3:30 am); and he was definitely an intensely (read: hopelessly) romantic person.

Consequently he had a lot of the same problems dating that WHDMA describes. But I would never say he was an asshole. Oddball, maybe.

Dan, you might have read a bit too much from his letter.
Posted by Nathan on April 23, 2009 at 5:03 AM · Report
77
To SWM

I recommend that you ease up on your search for a partner for 2 reasons.

1. You are unique and the odds that you find someone similar are slim.

It's sad but to find a parther, you may need to sacrifice some of your idealism and conform.

As Dan often says, "To settle down, you have to settle for."

2. I bet that even if you do find someone, you will be dissatisfied.

I bet you have a vivid imagination that reality can never match.
Posted by Used to be like you on April 23, 2009 at 5:21 AM · Report
78
What exactly is a "wingman"? And how can a woman be one? Shouldn't she be a "wingwoman", whatever the hell that means? I'm guessing from the context it's similar to pimp or procurer. Shtupping is so complex these days.
Posted by the waynster on April 23, 2009 at 5:42 AM · Report
79
Intensity is not just a way of being, it's also a method of control. That's the "creepy stalker" scenario.

However, even if he's just an innocent manic, dating bipolar guys can be almost as bad as a real asshole. The emotional roller coaster rides were too much for me. It was like being swept out to sea, without a life raft.
Posted by rrr on April 23, 2009 at 7:27 AM · Report
80
what happened to the clue in phrase for straight acting gay metal dudes?
Posted by driver on April 23, 2009 at 7:57 AM · Report
81
That Wild Horses New Yorker just sounds like a douchebag
Posted by john on April 23, 2009 at 8:14 AM · Report
82
Waynester: "Wingman" can be used for either / all gender combinations. Basically, the person is there to run interference if someone seems interested but is too shy to approach directly, to repel the creeps, and to make sure the "pilot" gets home safely (ideally with someone attractive and free of obvious psychoses).

For my $.02 - guys who think they're a phenomenal catch generally aren't. And yeah, a lot of times "intense and romantic" guys aren't necessarily assholes, but they do tend to be clingly and/or obsessive and/or *always* wanting to talk about heavy shit. Lighten up already!
Posted by Electric Maenad on April 23, 2009 at 8:24 AM · Report
83
To Intense, with Marbles Intact - my guess is that most of the posters who mention alarm bells with respect to WHDMA are speaking from personal experience. Women, even today, are generally expected to be accommodating and pliant relative to men. Unfortunately, that means many of us ignore our alarm bells the first time they go off and end up in a bad situation. After that, the smart ones start listening to those bells. You would be amazed at how many of your female friends and acquaintances have been creeped, stalked, or worse. So don't be dismissive of something you can't hear.
Posted by CLM on April 23, 2009 at 8:26 AM · Report
84
People who describe themselves as "very intense" and "very romantic" in the same sentence, are often seen as "stalkers" by more objective observers.

I bet he's the type to shower a girl with flowers - not just once, but every day for weeks after their first date. And to phone her and text her and FB her and Twitter about how great she is, as often as he can get to the computer. And he probably wants to tell her his whole life story, and meet her mom, and introduce him to his whole family, and have The Talk about getting married and having lots of babies - all before they have reached their one-month anniversary. (Which he will commemorate in high style, of course.)

Because this is what very intense! very romantic! guys generally do - they go way overboard with the romantic gestures, often before the woman is ready. And if she tells him she's not ready, or not interested, his response is to up the romance, because clearly, that's the way to win over a woman.

I'm reading a lot into those two little words, I know. But I've dated this guy before - or if not him, then plenty of others like him. Most women see those two words together as a big red flag. What he sees as "intense and romantic," women see as "crazy and stalkerish." I don't know about counselling, but certainly a little bit of restraint is never a bad thing when you're trying to get a date.
Posted by JMegan on April 23, 2009 at 10:34 AM · Report
85
One more thing ... and maybe some of the women will agree with this.

If he truely was an asshole, he probably wouldn't be writing the letter. He would be doing just fine.

If he actually could lighten up and let go of things, he would probably get everything he ever wanted.

And someone, and perhaps many more than one, would actually appreciate his intensity.

I guess, it's kind of weird that most women in this thread will identify the problem but not propose a solution. They give the "oh god creepy stalker get away from me" speech. But I don't think he's a lost cause. As many guys point out, intensity can be an asset. Don't expect the woman to feel as deeply about things as you do and learn to lighten up and let go.
Posted by intense and occassionally gets some on April 23, 2009 at 12:00 PM · Report
86
this week's column- LAME
Posted by ephes0@aim.com on April 23, 2009 at 1:11 PM · Report
87
this week's column- LAME
Posted by ephes0 on April 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM · Report
88
First poster competition. Wow! Here’s an idea, try to be the LAST poster, eh?
Posted by Liz1388 on April 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM · Report
89
can a cup of tea teabag the drinker? or does the drinker teabag the cup of hot water. simple, people. durr.
Posted by jel on April 23, 2009 at 1:39 PM · Report
90
So thats it huh? A column half filed with a promotion to a festival that most of your readers won't be able to see? I usually love your column but this one seemed incredibly phoned in. Run a best of rather than doing something like this. Or at least put in a rant about Miss Ca.
Posted by Cam on April 23, 2009 at 1:42 PM · Report
91
CLM,

I've said many times to friends what a travesty it is that so many women are abused (something like 1 in 4).

I also don't think some women's choice to be indirect, or avoid hurting feelings in any way, does not help. In other words the compliance and accomodation you speak of, should stop. Not only is it disrespectful, but when normal guys like myself know to leave someone alone, an actual stalker may not. Would you expect them to first pick up the signal, second interpret it correctly (maybe interpret it for weakness instead of kindness?) or even thirdly to care?

I am not dismissive. If I were dismissive, I would not be asking you to examine your motives for rejection of intense people, and suggesting, knowing full well I may be wrong, where your motives come from.

However, the ARE stereotypes in this world, there is lots of fear mongering, and the pliance and accomodation of women towards men has to stop in my opinion, and directness and openess used as often as possible.

And as far as rejection goes personally, I can and have accepted it. It comes with the territory of who I am, and how women and society currently are. I'm not sure how many women are really interested in what I'm interested in, and whether or not the visible number of them would change if they knew whether or not their alarm bells were false or correct. But I do know that I prefer directness and honesty from women, and knowing that, I am not going to false advertise.

If I am misapprehended by women as a potential stalker, without having done any previous stalking to their knowledge (and I've said already that I have never stalked), I feel my best defence is not to be one.

Thank you for responding though, and for the record I don't think you were wrong in any of your points, save for suggesting that I was dismissive.
More...
Posted by Intense, with Marbles Intact on April 23, 2009 at 2:09 PM · Report
92
"Not a Romantic" is right on - any guy wanting "intense and consuming" is going to define those words (and emotions) on his own terms. Reminds me of an ex boyfriend who was consistently disappointed in the "intensity" of my orgasms - as measured by his standards, of course. No one is going to date this narcissistic freak.
Posted by fayaway on April 23, 2009 at 3:18 PM · Report
93
Ooops, there's a double negative in my last post.

I meant to say, "I also don't think some women's decision to be indirect, or avoid hurting feelings, helps."

I think I've written too much on this thread (maybe due to my intensity, and maybe not). But here I go again...

I feel I should admit that at one point, due to inexperience and emotional immaturity, I mishandled a few relationships. They ended (most often by my explicit doing) due to my being uncomfortable, which had a lot to do with not knowing what my partner was feeling.

I was also insecure about being a nerd, and being interested in various obscure and non-mainstream things.

After contributing on here, I've had time to reflect on these experiences, and specifiocally I wondered if things would be different if I met these women again, and I took seriously the thought that screwing up was worth more then than succeeding now.

In a way, I am succeeding now. I am comfortable with who I am comfortable, if occasionally not delighted, with the level of communication I get from women, and understand then even if I disagree.

My roomate from last year, also now a good friend, went through the same process of change before me.

I would wager, now, after reflection (but granted we don't know how old he is), that he just needs time, and maybe the screw ups he's had or is having, to emotionally mature, calm down and be comfortable- with himself, most importantly, if he's anything like me.
Posted by Intense, with Marbles Intact on April 23, 2009 at 4:03 PM · Report
94
@ intense and occassionally gets some;
@ Intense, with Marbles Intact:

I feel like most women on this thread have been saying that Wild Horses is sending the signals of being creepy, not that he actually is creepy. That in itself suggests a solution: relax a bit and stop projecting a need for intensity.

From his letter, I don't necessarily feel that WHDMA is an asshole or creepy or abusive or stalkerish. I do feel, however, that based on the way he described himself, it is likely that the signals he sends come off as such. If he is a decent guy and these messages are coming from a poor presentation of himself and not from any inherent creepiness, the obvious solution would be to take the advice of his friends and modify what he communicates about himself to the ladies he pursues.

This has nothing to do with prejudice or fear-mongering. Most people who have had bad relationship experiences develop a hyper-awareness of what they consider to be warnings of a similar experience as a protection mechanism. The coming on really fast really strong that usually goes along with self described intense romantics feels similar to the coming on really fast really strong that usually goes with creepers.

He'll have more luck beginning a relationship that eventually develops into something intensely romantic if he doesn't scare off all potential partners by approaching relationships in a way that many women have learned from experience to respond to with trepidation.
Posted by Oh Suzanna on April 23, 2009 at 4:26 PM · Report
95
Man, I thought teabagging meant that a guy surprised someone by putting his balls on that person. Like snuck up behind someone who was watching TV and set his balls on that person's head. I didn't know it was a sexual act!
Posted by jessi on April 23, 2009 at 4:35 PM · Report
96
Sounds like WHDMA might be kinky. Maybe he's not an asshole, but more of a "dominant personality" (it's a fine line, but it does exist). He should go on FetLife and meet some submissive women and see if it might be a good fit.
Posted by RhythmGirl on April 23, 2009 at 4:57 PM · Report
97
Agreed, Not A Romantic!! I dated a really cool and talented writer once, but I felt like with me he stopped being himself and started playing a script. And wasn't interested in me, but in my playing along with his script. It lasted two weeks. My current boyfriend doesn't do romantic gestures - but he does things that show he loves and appreciates ME, not a generic woman. To me, that's romance.
Posted by Not Living In A Danielle Steele Novel on April 23, 2009 at 6:11 PM · Report
98
You were amazing on This American Life tonight. I was very touched by your story.
Posted by Katie on April 23, 2009 at 7:12 PM · Report
99
JMegan: I'm reading a lot into those two little words, I know. But I've dated this guy before - or if not him, then plenty of others like him. Most women see those two words together as a big red flag. What he sees as "intense and romantic," women see as "crazy and stalkerish."

It's not just a question of "he sees/she sees." To a large extent, how you and many other women view a man depends on how you feel about him, or how attracted you are to him. If an intense and romantic guy is really into you and you're also really into him, you'll see him and describe him to your friends as "intense and romantic." But if he's really into you and you're not into him, then he becomes "crazy and stalkerish."
Posted by JD on April 23, 2009 at 9:12 PM · Report
100
There's nothing "extreme" about trying therapy. That would be the ideal for someone who wants to improve his relationships and get some self understanding.
Posted by Faygelah on April 23, 2009 at 11:14 PM · Report
101
@Wild Horses: Use an online dating site. Get a book on online dating from your local library or independent bookstore first. Let the women get to know you online, where they won't be quite so knocked out by your physical beauty, and your intensity will be somewhat muted. For people who are not at their best on first dates, virtual introductions are a godsend. I know at least three happily married/cohabiting couples who either met, or, due to distance, did most of their courting online. They all remember their courtship as very romantic, and they have all those emails and IM's tied up in virtual pink ribbon in their inboxes as evidence.
Posted by P.C. on April 24, 2009 at 6:57 AM · Report
102
Yes - I've dated an 'intense' guy also. He wanted LOVE, and had all of these expectations and ideas for the way it would be. But it was all about him. What never seemed to figure into it was the actual other person, and her interests and passions. He got way too into me way to fast, but... he didn't actually know me. Just the idea of me.
Posted by lisa on April 24, 2009 at 8:32 AM · Report
103
I wish you'd add little "YOWZA" thumbs up symbols to comment features. I want to point at 'not a romantic' and 'spinal' comments and say, yeah, what they said without taking up valuable space in the comments section.

(by adding the comment about the comment feature, I am writing something original..which means now I can say Yeah! I bet they got that guy pinned: Too needy and not really seeing the Romantic Object as an actual person.

Posted by echo on April 24, 2009 at 10:03 AM · Report
104
Only two letters? HUMPH!
That said, Dan, you were the best part of the This American Life simulcast Thursday last. You managed to let the emotion come through with losing your grip. Did your mom proud, even if she's NOT looking down on you from the clouds. Plus, you're looking a lot hotter than I expected, after reading all your promises to grow obese in middle age. Been hitting the gym, have we? Reeow!
Posted by Het middle-aged mom/Dan fan on April 24, 2009 at 10:12 AM · Report
105
Just a thought. I wouldn't mind some perspective on this.

Socially, I think it is more acceptable for women to be in love with idea of a relationship more than the man being in love with the idea of a relationship more than woman. I mean, why are women so obsessed with wedding porn magazines? A girl gets boy friend, she wants to parade him around the girls and make a spectavle of him. I'm not accusing anyone of this, but it's sad when this happens.

And yes, unfortunately I'll openly admit that often I use my women as props. I'm an intense guy, who likes spectacles dates, and adventures. I do offer a lot in return, but to get to my agenda there really is most certainly a HUGE level of trust that needs to happen before you can have an intimate experience with someone. Funny how society works these days, but giving a girl flowers is like 12th base!

I'm drawn to this thread because it well, because Dan for starters, read this so totally wrong and he is usually quite good. I'm baffled at how he missed this one, really really baffled.

But the other thing is, I obviously am intense and attractive looking person. It sometimes depresses me that this weekend, it would be much easier and productive for me to find a lay than someone to accompany me on my motorcycle to the olympic peninsula and eat shellfish. But with a little time and experience, this conundrum will work itself out. As sick as it sounds to some people, and at least for now. DATING MORE THAN ONE PERSON AT A TIME helps me control the intensity. By not putting all my passion in one basket, at least for me, helps me to take things a little lighter and not be all obsessive and possessive about women. And then stangly enough, things inevitably fall into place and you DO get those intense experiences you desire. Then with time, you can build trust and filter it down to one girl. Who won't feel smothered, and I won't feel so dependent on "the one".
More...
Posted by intense but occaisonaly gets some on April 24, 2009 at 10:15 AM · Report
106
oh yeah ... after my fifth that that sounds way too douchy.

Never post hungover
Posted by intense but occaisionally gets some on April 24, 2009 at 10:18 AM · Report
107
Anyone else read the statement about an "intense and consuming" relationship and start thinking it sounded a bit too Jeffrey Dahmerish?

Posted by Ann on April 24, 2009 at 10:20 AM · Report
108
@ Faygelah RE: "extreme" therapy

I accept that "extreme" without qualification was probably a poor adjective choice in my original post. I may have been reading too much into WHDMA's comment about counseling "to try to tame my personality" as considering therapy to change himself, not to gain a better understanding of himself and his relationships. I think that he does not need to take the extreme measure of trying to alter his core self, as I originally interpreted his comment. I agree that therapy to "improve his relationships and get some self understanding" would not be extreme, and that I likely misinterpreted the intent of that remark.

It sounded like his friends were available and interested to help him on this path to understanding. If that is not true, or if he is uncomfortable accepting their help, then therapy would likely be a good option in the pursuit of understanding. However, if he is looking at counseling as a way to "tame his personality" without understanding, then I see that as a... well... extreme option and do not recommend it until other avenues for solving his problem have been explored.
Posted by Oh Suzanna on April 24, 2009 at 12:22 PM · Report
109
This has mostly been said already - but when someone labels themselves as 'intense' and 'romantic' it's offputting because it's this awful combination of genericism - they're not feeling intense and romantic because of anything special about YOU, it's just how they are, and expectation - they're investing so much, you need to live up to it all. It's discouraging and exhausting (to me). I'd so much rather feel that as someone gets to know me well they find they feel like they've never felt before, than have to live up to some intense ideal they built up before they had any idea who they was.

But then, I don't actually believe in love at first sight.

But I'd say therapy is a good idea. More self-awareness is almost always a good thing.
Posted by janus on April 24, 2009 at 1:11 PM · Report
110
Talking to a therapist is not at all extreme.
Posted by R on April 24, 2009 at 4:28 PM · Report
111
Intense But With Marbles Intact -

Can you stop posting now? You frighten me.
Posted by JustSayin on April 24, 2009 at 6:15 PM · Report
112
To the first guy, look up Randall Woodfield. You sound like him.
Posted by scared of intense romantics on April 24, 2009 at 6:49 PM · Report
113
JustSayin,

Nice joke. :)

And... no... I had to post again it seems...
Posted by Intense, with Marbles Intact on April 24, 2009 at 9:37 PM · Report
114
Dear Anonymously Me,

Looks to me like you just discovered your prostate. Enjoy.
Posted by Yvette on April 24, 2009 at 10:20 PM · Report
115
Regarding Wild Horses, in all my 39 years of living, the most intense relationships I have witnessed tend to be a double-edge sword. On-the-one-hand, you can literally "feel" the chemistry between the two people, even in their glances at each other. But, on-the-other hand, stay the hell away from them when they fight, because anything within a 10 mile radius gets annihilated. Intense relationships = the most volatile. With the extreme highs, come the extreme lows.

Yet, those relationships that I have witnessed enduring the test of time, are the couples that connect with a person that ultimately becomes their "best friend." "Best Friend" relationships tend to compromise more, respect each other more, laugh with each other more, fight less, and last for years after the sex has become less intense and takes on that "ordinary & familiar" feel.

The question for Wild Horses is, which relationship does he ultimately wish to end up with?
Posted by Frau Blucher on April 25, 2009 at 6:09 AM · Report
116
Bad advice from Dan again...
Posted by Sorani on April 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM · Report
117
Come on Frau... you want to watch from a safe a distance ... binoculars or thanks to technology, fast frame remote camera!

Posted by intense but occaisonally gets some on April 25, 2009 at 2:20 PM · Report
118
wait, so that guy won't have sex with his girlfriend for ten days at a time because she's on her period. the thought of sex with a girl on her period makes his 'stomach turn'? i don't think he can be considered heterosexual...and also he sounds like a total asshole. she should dump him.
Posted by douglas on April 25, 2009 at 3:44 PM · Report
119
Tee hee. Book of Mormon.

If you had balls, real balls, you would have made a Koran (and not a translation, but an arabic language Koran) as the extra credit prop.

Oops, can't risk offending Muslims! Especially not the ones that stone homosexuals to death!

OK to offend Mormons - they'll only respond by prosletizing you in a polite way.

COWARD!
Posted by Why the hate on Mormons? on April 25, 2009 at 4:30 PM · Report
120
The word "intense" is a euphamism for psychotic, self-absorbed freak! Dude is a serial killer waiting to happen and I, for one, don't want to be gyrating my beav at some hot azz hip hop club when spooky intense boy goes psycho and pulls out the gladiator sword he bought off of some lame nerd website. Don't even think of pullin' no crazy azz shite without buying me a Lemon Drop first, oh yeah!
Posted by Hermione Hairpie on April 25, 2009 at 9:42 PM · Report
121
Hermione Hairpie,

I find it amusing that you can so confidently and exclusively label "intense" as a euphemism, for "psychotic, self-sbsorbed freak!" and, in the same post, accept someone like that as long as they don't "think of pullin' no crazy azz shite...

"... WITHOUT BUYING ME A LEMON DROP FIRST."

Your self-endangering shallowness,either comical or real, is astounding. If you don't even have thoughts of self-preservation, I doubt you have any accurate thoughts of other people's characters.

And expressed throughout with spectacularly bad grammar and spelling.

I'm sorry to point out. :)

Actually I'm not sorry... no...
Posted by Intense, with Marbles Intact on April 26, 2009 at 1:03 AM · Report
122
WHDMA

Here's a clue. Your letter is all "I,I,Me,Me,My." It's a first-person express train from yourself to yourself. There is only one statement that reveals any doubt about your greatness, where you say you fuck up and make yourself lonely, but you're still talking about you and yourself. You made yourself lonely. What about the woman? Did SHE have any thoughts or feelings? If you don't know, then there's your problem.
Posted by arsfrisco on April 26, 2009 at 3:01 AM · Report
123
Menstruation sex is the best; you don't need any lube. Just keep a towel nearby.

DTMFA already, since you could have someone enthusiastically fucking you all 10 of those days.
Posted by VJGoh on April 26, 2009 at 4:06 AM · Report
124
Why the hate on Mormons?: Book of Mormon. If you had balls, real balls, you would have made a Koran (and not a translation, but an arabic language Koran) as the extra credit prop. Oops, can't risk offending Muslims! Especially not the ones that stone homosexuals to death! OK to offend Mormons - they'll only respond by prosletizing you in a polite way. COWARD!

First, you should clearly understand any antipathy The Stranger would have towards Mormons. LDS members poured in tens of millions of dollars to pass Prop 8 and defeat same-sex marriage in California. Mormons forcing their values on gays and lesbians via Prop 8 isn't exactly "proselytizing in a polite way." I've no doubt that plenty of Muslims voted for Prop 8 too, but they probably weren't the force that Mormons (or Christians) were, due to lack of money and people.

Second, it's not fair to call The Stranger a coward vis-a-vis Islam (or, more specifically, repressive Islamic fundamentalism) when, in February 2006, they DID show real balls by running four of the infamous Danish Muhammad cartoons, accompanying an excellent article on Islamic fundamentalism by Bruce Bawer.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Conte…

But, all that being said, if your point is that Islamic fundamentalists are more rabidly hateful (and rabidly violent) towards gays and lesbians -- as well as towards people who are critical of their prophet, "holy" book, and religion in general -- than are Mormons (and Christian fundamentalists) I couldn't agree more.
Posted by JD on April 26, 2009 at 10:30 AM · Report
125
WHDMA sounds like a psychooooo
Posted by Caralain on April 26, 2009 at 3:16 PM · Report
126
regarding "anonymously me", there is a word in the english language that describes him very well. it is "retarded".
Posted by jeffsd on April 26, 2009 at 4:03 PM · Report
127
When people refer to themselves as "romantic," "idealistic," and "intense" it usually means one or more of the following:

1. I'm desperate
2. I'm unrealistic
3. I'm arrogant and self-idealizing
4. I'm unwilling to compromise
5. I'm needy and clingy
6. I'm deeply jealous/possessive
7. I'm emotionally unstable
8. I'm an asshole wrapped in sweet-smelling fantasies of my own idealism and attractiveness.

Any ONE of these messages would send most prospects running. Wild Horses must be sending off more than a whiff of several of them...
Posted by jack on April 27, 2009 at 1:06 AM · Report
128
celebrate my anus now
Posted by fighting to preserve anus spaces on April 27, 2009 at 8:50 AM · Report
129
Even though a lot of women and men have already commented on the 1st letter, I have to add my own $0.02 to WHDMA's letter. Here is a translation:

'I am very fit and very attractive':
I am arrogant and self absorbed.

'I am well-read and well-spoken.':
I am a show-off who is extremely insecure about my educational backround and intelligence.

'I march to the beat of my own drum.':
I am a poorly socialized creep, with a consuming interest in science fiction, witchcraft, renaissance fairs, computers, guns, knives, political demonstrations, environmental issues, cars, motorcycles, obscure musical groups, militairy reenactment...(fill in the blank.) I usually dress all in black and have wierd facial hair and a lot of piercings and tattoos. And they look stunning on me!

'Friends tell me my personality is intense.':
I am overbearing, loudmouthed, and want every person in the room to focus on ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME! I will do anything to make sure that I get the attention to which I'm entitled. I am very proud of all my abrasive qualities and don't care who I offend, or how. I'm just perfect this way. I really don't agree with the people who actually have the nerve to tell me otherwise, even if they are my friends. (And they're SO lucky to have me!)

'I'm extremely idealistic.':
I am self-righteous and intolerant, and never miss an chance to lecture people as to how they should be doing things MY way.

'I count myself as a romantic.':
I'm looking for a Barbi doll who will conform to my rigidly defined sexual stereotypes. In exchange, I will publicly embarass her with a lot of extravagant 'romantic' gestures that will call attention to ME ME ME ME! and demonstrate what a great guy I am. I will remain stubbornly oblivious to how uncomfortable and embarrassed those public gestures make her feel.

"I am looking for an intense and consuming love affair with a woman.":
I am an insanely jealous, emotionally immature whacko who expects to find a woman (anyone with a pulse will do, as long as she's very very attractive) who I will stalk, smother, and control. I will make sure she has no time left in her own life to work, hang out with friends or family or spend any time without ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!

'Friends tell me my approach to women scares them off.':
I am desperate, socially tone-deaf, and unable to understand why women don't fall at my feet and worship me.

'Yet, when a lady friend of mine suggested I spend a night out with her where she would act as my wingman, I recoiled.':
I am in the habit of GIVING (undsolicited) advice, not taking it. I will NOT be contradicted, particularly not when it comes to my own high opinion of myself.

'Prowling for random women in a bar doesn't fit my sense of romance.':
I always strike out, because 'ladies' don't hang out in bars.

"Should I consider counseling to try and tame my personality?":

GOD no! Frankly, you sound like a sociopath. Counseling doesn't benefit them, it just teaches them to be better sociopaths.

More...
Posted by Redblues on April 28, 2009 at 6:49 AM · Report
130
for the niece of Flo:
10 days seems painfully long.
talk to your ob/gyn ~ using low dosage birth control pill to regulate your cycle might be a good thing.
Posted by ho-hum on April 28, 2009 at 11:04 AM · Report
131
sorry redblues. My boss is a sociopath, and he does just fine.

And no he wouldn't write to Dan Savage.

I think you are close, but here is the thing. Genuine sociopaths don't have to ask for help, for some sick reason things just work out for them.

All of those things you state, are ALMOST true. For some reason the intense the person gives off the vibe of and a scent of a sociopath, while the real sociopaths get off scot free.

The truely "intense" person is like a person who is given lanky clumsy body that works horribly in adolescence and takes some time to fill out into adulthood. They just need time and experience to get social maturity, and maybe some judging by blatant naysayers who just don't understand them. Just so they know what NOT to portray.

If you think about it, there is a slight difference between self centered and selfish. Self centered means a lack of awareness of what is going on around you and your impact on others REGARDLESS OF INTENT. I've hurt many people due to ignorance, and made many mistakes the hard way. It sucks, and something I genuinly feel guilty about. Selfish means to take without consequence, ie sociopath.
Posted by former tristate on April 28, 2009 at 3:53 PM · Report
132
as a not-so-intense, plain old honest asshole and misanthrope, i would recommend that wild horses post a personal ad, as detailed and personality-driven as possible. who you are, what you want, what will happen in this relationship (i even went so far as to post that the living room of my shared apartment with my next boyfriend will be lime green. and it was!). worked for me, and i'll even be married in two weeks.

thing about us assholes, intense or not, is that while most people don't fit our standards, we will put it all on the line for someone who does.

i don't think a personality change is necessary, just acceptance of the fact that us assholes may never find someone we tolerate, and we're okay alone. better off alone, even, instead of with someone we don't really like. and the same can be applied to people's dealings with us. no hypocrisy here. not everyone meets everyone's tastes.

bear in mind, however, that specific, dramatic tastes don't equal "romantic." controlling and picky, sure. but own it, roll with it, don't try to soften it, and you'll find someone who fits you.
Posted by jenvanleigh on April 28, 2009 at 5:14 PM · Report
133
Dear Wild Horses, try shutting up, and being polite. You'll get laid right away even if you're butt ugly. I promise.

"Intense" coupled with "marching to the beat of your own drum" equals someone who needs to get over themselves pretty damn soon because he thinks he's not being true to himself if he doesn't say every damn thing that comes into his head and express all of his opinions, which of course comes across as "thinking he knows everything." Or, "asshole."

Wild Horses, try meeting a woman at a bar (or coffee shop) and telling her NOTHING about yourself, except maybe your name and age. Instead, ask her a thousand questions about herself and only say, "That's cool." Or, "That's interesting." Or, "That must have been hard/fun." Try just listening, dude, and not reacting.

You will still be the exact same person. Your romantic soul will be the same. You can still have all of your opinions, if you still want them after you learn about other people.

Posted by robt vesco, jr on April 28, 2009 at 5:14 PM · Report
134
I wanted to add some information for "AFTER". First, as a woman, I would NOT be giving the guy a blowjob during the time he refuses to touch me. Hands (and mouths, and other body parts) should go both ways.

Second, if the boyfriend doesn't agree to mutual cessation of activities during the period of her period, she needs to DTMFA and suggest he try dating an Orthodox Jew or some other woman who heeds the strict language of Leviticus 15:19-28. Sounds as if he's on that page and he needs a woman who's agreeable.
Posted by MLH860 on May 1, 2009 at 5:44 AM · Report
135
I'm with het middle aged mom /Dan fan----

Dan--!!!!!! You are one hot stud!!!
Posted by auntie grizelda on May 1, 2009 at 5:53 AM · Report
136
Tristate:
Not every sociopath is successful. I've known more than one who were abject failures. And some of them are successful in one area, but not in another, like 'Wild Horses'. Either way, everything is all about them.
Posted by redblues on May 1, 2009 at 1:07 PM · Report
137
Intense SWM should may do well to find out what the girl he's interested in considers romantic. He should totally take up the offer of the female friend to be wingman, and maybe really listen to what his friends are saying. If he's actually interested in Romance.

As for AUNT flo problem, two words -- tampons and oral. No fuss, no muss.
Posted by just sayin on May 1, 2009 at 1:56 PM · Report
138
Amen to seating Al Franken. Love, All Minnesotans who wish Norm Coleman's circus would pack up his goddamned tents.
Posted by MinnySota on May 1, 2009 at 6:44 PM · Report
139
WHDMA could take a page out of this guy's book-- he's less intense:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/are…
Posted by ballixPloeger on May 5, 2009 at 5:39 PM · Report
140
I swear, this year's Hump! was made for me. It's like... destiny. Fem Domme, Pegging, CFNM, the BOOK OF MORMON?!?!? It's like fate wants me to dive into porn! :D Thank you Dan!

Don't listen to the whiners who are bitching about less letters. I am SO glad you informed me of this. I owe you. Big time.
Posted by XiaoGui17 on June 7, 2009 at 9:15 PM · Report
141
Hey, your article said "Book of Mormon" but the ad in the link says Mormon undergarments. Which I imagine may be a great deal harder to get my hands on and incorporate. Your ad is misleading, Dan. I blow a raspberry in your general direction.
Posted by XiaoGui17 on June 7, 2009 at 9:28 PM · Report

Add a comment

Most Commented in Columns