Follow Dan

Facebook    Twitter    Instagram    YouTube
Savage Lovecast
Dan Savage's Hump
It Gets Better Project

Savage Love Podcast

Got a question for Dan Savage?
Call the Savage Love Podcast at 206-201-2720
or email Dan at mail@savagelove.net.

Savage Love Archives

More in the Archives »

More from Dan Savage

More in the Archives »

Books by Dan Savage

Want a Second Opinion?

Contact Dan Savage

Savage on YouTube

Loading...

Moral Bankrupt

October 29, 2009

  • comments
  • Print

I'm a 67-year-old woman, almost 68, who has been married four times—once widowed (with three kids in their 40s who've turned out pretty well), divorced three times. I recently met someone online: 48, a wealthy, educated man with two boys, 12 and 14. He lives the cuckoldt lifestyle and is looking for a woman to marry who would participate and enjoy this with him. He says he "craves and needs" this lifestyle, and from what he's said so far, the boys have been trained from an early age to also live this lifestyle and would require that the woman he marries include them in all ways.

I've done some research and think I could be quite happy being a dominant. However, my concern is that he wants me to be sexual with the boys. He says that at home they practice familial nudity. He also wants me to take each one to a hotel on their respective birthdays (he doesn't say at what age) and take their virginities. He has also suggested that, once we are living together, if I wake up horny I should go to one of the boys' rooms and "grind my cunt into his face and fuck the boy." I think this is excessive and could traumatize the boys. I don't know if this type of extreme behavior is just fantasy for him or if he is serious.

If I like this man after meeting him, I would consider this lifestyle, but with boundaries where the boys are concerned. As the dominant, what I say goes, no questions asked (he has agreed to this in a recent IM), but I think we need to find a balance.

I'm interested in your thoughts on all of this. Thank you.

New To Cuckholdting

What do I think? I'm thinking—and hoping and praying—that this letter is complete bullshit. And I think I'm gonna go boil my laptop after writing this response. And I think I'm tempted to forward your e-mail on to the police. And I think I would do just that if I wasn't convinced that this man with whom you've been corresponding—assuming you exist, NTC—is just another creepy pervert furiously beating off in front of a computer as he spins out his insanely creepy sexual fantasies for a gullible online audience of one.

But two details lead me to believe that there could actually be a four-times-married, thrice-divorced, once-widowed moral bankrupt out there receiving e-mails and IMs from a man who claims to be into "the cuckoldt lifestyle," "familial nudity," and the sexual abuse of his adolescent children: your age and your inability to spell "cuckold." If a creep with child-rape fantasies wrote this letter, NTC, you wouldn't be 67 going on 68 with reservations. You would be 37 at the most with DD breasts, and you would've spelled cuckold correctly. (Unless... sigh... the creep was into intergenerational sex and lousy spellers on top of everything else.)

Now: If this man and his children exist, NTC, he's abusing his children and they should be removed from his home immediately. He's scum, NTC, as is any woman who would for a moment contemplate shacking up with this piece of shit. Because, again, what your Interwebs friend describes is not the "cuckoldt lifestyle," it's the rape and systematic sexual abuse of children. A man who is into cuckolding gets off on his wife having consensual sex with other adult men, not his children; a woman into cuckolding gets off on "cheating" on her husband with other adult men, not her minor stepchildren.

Once again for the record: I don't think this guy is for real or that these kids exist. I think some creepy pervert is sitting in front of a computer furiously rubbing 'em out as he chats with you. Interacting with someone on the web who believes that he's telling the truth—someone who believes that he's wealthy, educated, and has two boys at home anxious to be sexually abused by a woman old enough to be their grandmother—turns him on. And so he lurks online until he lands someone gullible and morally bereft enough to buy in.

Okay! Let's end with a note about standards and practices here at Savage Love: I typically change identifying details in a letter—exact ages, number of divorces, number of children—lest someone inadvertently out themselves to their family and friends. I didn't do that in NTC's case, because I'm praying to God that—if NTC exists—one of her children sees this letter and recognizes dear ol' Mom. And if her kids are reading: Hey, guys, it's time to take Mom's cars keys, credit cards, and computer away. Dementia has set in, or Mom's been demented all along. Either way, she's a danger to herself and others, and you might want to stage an intervention before the criminal- justice system does.


I am in desperate need. I have been dating a guy for two years. We're both 25, and we love each other a lot. He's sexy as hell (half Asian, quarter Native, quarter black—he's divine), we connect, he's funny, upbeat, and honest. Unfortunately, we have a recurring fight (once or twice a month), and I wonder if we will ever resolve this issue. He likes the attention of other women. The fight goes like this: He will do something borderline inappropriate with some chick right in front of me (most recently, he had 30 consecutive drunk-posts on Facebook with some 19-year-old he met through his roommate), and I will get pissed and hurt. I approach him calmly and say that it feels disrespectful and I hope that one day we will come to an agreement on this issue. He swears that it is all in my head and that I work myself up over nothing. But he KNOWS it hurts my feelings, and my hurt is made worse because he is disregarding my feelings. He usually gets mad, says he "didn't do anything wrong" and he "can't talk to me anymore," and then I won't hear from him for a day or so.

I have friends telling me that this is a deal breaker and that I am being emotionally abused. I don't know if I believe that—I think he just needs to work on boundaries. I just had a "come to Jesus" talk with the boy, and he still feels like he didn't cross any lines and refuses to apologize. But to make me feel guilty, he said he will "never post anything on another girl's Facebook page ever again." That's not what I wanted. Now my face hurts from crying, and I want someone sane to tell me which way is up. Whose side are you on? I would actually be happier if you told me that I was crazy and controlling, because altering my own attitude is a lot easier than trying to get through to him.

Pleeeeeease help.

Hurting In Oregon

Ah... a nice, normal problem to cleanse the palate after the shit sandwich that opens the column this week.

I'm not on anyone's side in this dispute, HIO. You sound like an insecure, passive-aggressive guilt tripper, and the boyfriend sounds like an inconsiderate flirt. You've been having the same fight twice a month for two years. Enough already. If the sex, the connection, and his race-based divinity don't compensate for the flirting, end this relationship. If they do, HIO, stay with him—but only if you can stop policing his interactions with other women and stop bitching about the flirting to him, to your friends, and to me. recommended


mail@savagelove.net

 

Comments (140) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1 Comment Pulled (OffTopic) Comment Policy
2
That second one has nothing to do with sex at all! It always makes me a little sad when it's just relationship advice and not sex advice at all. And just two letters this week?
Posted by emilywhat on October 27, 2009 at 6:27 PM · Report this
3
Brilliant! As per usual.
Posted by EricPraline on October 27, 2009 at 6:28 PM · Report this
4
awesome
Posted by perky on October 27, 2009 at 7:03 PM · Report this
5
@2 - there's another that he just posted on his blog. Pretty good one, too.
Posted by laurelgardner http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5877570 on October 27, 2009 at 7:13 PM · Report this
6
Meh. Rude and dismissive.
Posted by MARCH on October 27, 2009 at 7:20 PM · Report this
7
@MARCH

Is this your first visit here? Those of us who are long time readers love Savage Love because it is curt and honest. Go read Ann Landers!
Posted by Dellisonly on October 27, 2009 at 7:59 PM · Report this
8
The letter from the 67 yr old is a croc - somewhere is a 22 yr old laughing his or her ass off. And I think Dan's response disrespected the elderly here a bit, the character in this fiction is only 67, hardly reaching the age to be senile, esp in today's world, and if she reads your column, she would must be a pretty hip grandma and given her 4 marriages, probably has a lot more relationship and sex wisdom than most, so she'd be able to call BS on her own.
Posted by bagel on October 27, 2009 at 8:06 PM · Report this
xoxoljl 9
Dan: It must be hard to separate the bullshit letters from the real ones all the time. I'm with you on the first letter, either this lady is so desperate she's willing to believe just 'bout anything. Or the whole piece is a lie... either way... great answer! I just hope her children are reading it and are ready to pull the plug on Mom's behavior.
Posted by xoxoljl on October 27, 2009 at 8:06 PM · Report this
10
I think the first one is bullshit too but I would still forward it to the police.
Posted by Sailoreic on October 27, 2009 at 9:03 PM · Report this
kim in portland 11
Can I unread the first one. Please don't let it be real. Child rape is not a joke.
Posted by kim in portland http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/11/fast-paced_video_provides_a_fu.html on October 27, 2009 at 9:04 PM · Report this
12
If HIO is crying so hard her face hurts after at least twice a month and he feels justified making ridiculous blanket statements about "never posting on another girl's Facebook page again" then it seems a pretty clear case of DTMFA.
Posted by yo_in_Seattle on October 27, 2009 at 9:04 PM · Report this
13
@bagel: don't be ridiculous, senility can hit at younger ages, too. ever heard of early-onset alzheimer's? dan had a responsibility to take the letter from every possible angle, and he did so well. i dont think his response disrespected "the elderly" at all -- it rightfull disrespected someone not worthy of respect - whomever participated in the letter and/or its alleged events.
Posted by no 'count on October 27, 2009 at 9:11 PM · Report this
14
#8 Bagel, I hope the entire letter is a hoax, but I want to tell you that dementia (of whatever variety) can and does occur in people in their 50s and 60s. Yes, it's rarer then than later, but it does happen. It's sometimes very hard for the children (or whoever) to know when to intervene, but perhaps better too early than too late.
Posted by Abel on October 27, 2009 at 9:22 PM · Report this
15
Passive-aggressive means being unable to say what you want directly. HIO is being straight up honest with her boyfriend. There's nothing passive about that. And he's saying he won't change for her.

I agree with the advice. Accept him or leave.
Posted by Brie on October 27, 2009 at 10:00 PM · Report this
16
#8: 67 is not too young for senility. Alzheimers can strike people in their 40s, even.

Dan might not be a neurologist, but I don't think he's anti-elderly either.
Posted by RDM on October 27, 2009 at 10:08 PM · Report this
17
Ummmm...I'm confused. You said:

"I don't want you to post on girls' facebooks!"

And he said:

"Fine! I'll never post anything on another girl's Facebook page ever again."

And then you felt guilty because that's not what you wanted? It sounds to me like that's exactly what you wanted. If I were you, I would have responded with "Good! Finally you're doing what I want! Thank you for finally giving in to my demands!"
Posted by Doug D. on October 27, 2009 at 11:36 PM · Report this
TheMisanthrope 18
HIO should send her boyfriend to Tool Academy, so the rest of us can mock her while we also get to ogle her boyfriend's "Divinity."
Posted by TheMisanthrope on October 27, 2009 at 11:44 PM · Report this
19
@15: She is a _bit_ passive-aggressive. Saying "I hope that one day we will come to an agreement on this issue," when she really can't tolerate his behavior and wants it to stop is not exactly straight-up honest. What she says to the boy implies that she might meet him halfway on this, but the gist of her letter is that she'll either compromise entirely or (much more likely) leave him with her pride intact.
Posted by p-l on October 27, 2009 at 11:45 PM · Report this
20
What's with this weasle-ly, accept him OR leave? This is a clear case of DTMFA, although I'm not even sure she has a boyfriend to dump! They obviously have very different ideas about what sort of relationship they are in. If he believed he was in a committed relationship, he would at least flirt behind her back not right in front of her. She needs to move on.
Posted by Diagoras on October 28, 2009 at 12:19 AM · Report this
21 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
22
as always great advice dan and i hope that the first one is a fake as well
Posted by pollycub on October 28, 2009 at 5:46 AM · Report this
vitupera 23
Eh, HIO doesn't sound like a saint, but I'm feeling a little more sympathy for her. The best I can say for the boyfriend, considering how she describes his "I do no wrong" attitude, is that they're obviously no fucking good for each other. That said, she's in some deep goddamn denial, at best, to be willing to rehash a weepy argument twenty-odd times and counting. DTMFA.
Posted by vitupera on October 28, 2009 at 6:23 AM · Report this
24
I kept waiting for the part in the first letter where she says: "OMG, Dan! I'm so scared for these boys. Do you think I should go to the police?" So scary. I hope it's a hoax.
Posted by Lady M on October 28, 2009 at 7:35 AM · Report this
25
I agree with @10
Posted by MT3 on October 28, 2009 at 8:53 AM · Report this
26
HIO, my father is still doing that emotional abuse shit to my mother, exactly that way, they are in their 60s. I think he "quit facebook" 3 times this year to spite her. He always goes back, he's done far worse, and you need to DTMFA *right now*. That stuff is all about control. He keeps you off-balance and withholds what you want if you complain, so he is always in charge.
Posted by hio-dtmfa on October 28, 2009 at 9:43 AM · Report this
gr8lakesgrrl 27
#10, 11 & 24, tied for the win.
Posted by gr8lakesgrrl on October 28, 2009 at 9:48 AM · Report this
28
don't know if we helped ne1 this week. #2 is beyond help and #1 holyfookinshit! Dad forcing his 12 year old son to bang a 70 year old lady. I'm sorry but that one is to strange not to be real.
Posted by stormcrow on October 28, 2009 at 9:50 AM · Report this
nocutename 29
If HIO is crying so hard her face hurts twice a month, she needs to DTMFA. It doesn't matter whether either of them is being passive aggressive, or whether he's deliberately being emotionally abusive (and for the record, telling your girlfriend that the behavior you're practicing which makes her miserable and is dismissive of her stated feelings is not a problem and her problems with him are "all in [her] head" and then cutting off communication as a punishment qualifies as emotional abuse in my book). The bottom line is this relationship is making her unhappy far more often than it should. He's hot, yeah; leave him and find some other divinity who won't disregard your feelings.
Posted by nocutename on October 28, 2009 at 10:01 AM · Report this
30
About the second letter, how exactly is posting on Facebook being disrespectful to his girlfriend? I mean, if he's openly propositioning this girl or saying his girl friend doesn't matter, then sure, but if that were the case, HIO probably would have said he's doing that, not just that he's drunk posting on Facebook.
It sounds to me like she's saying if he talks to another woman at all, HIO gets upset. Talk about controlling.
As for the first one, send it to the police, there is so much wrong with that.
Posted by workingstiff on October 28, 2009 at 10:24 AM · Report this
31
Regarding letter 1: I don't know how laws are in WA regarding being a witness to child sexual abuse, but you may be legally OBLIGATED to forward that letter to authorities, real or not. Anyway, it's probably the right thing to do.
Posted by mehed on October 28, 2009 at 10:26 AM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 32
#2 HIO,
I'm kinda surprised Dan didn't just answer with a DTMFA. The girl's obviously not cool with her boyfriend's flirting and even if she "thinks" she can get over it... she hasn't been able to for two years. Seems cut and dry to me.

#1, ugh.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on October 28, 2009 at 10:35 AM · Report this
33
Sexual abuse of a child is always, always wrong & disgusting. I don't see much humor in it, either since I was sexually abused as a child. The notion that a father wants his kids introduced to sex by a "mother figure" is beyond disturbing & granny needs her wrinkled old ass kicked for even entertaining an involvement with the douchebag. Just...gross.

HIO sounds like she may be insecure & possibly feels like the Mixed-Race Masterpiece may be out of her league or she doesn't measure up somehow. Either way, flirting is nothing to get bent about. Unless he actually sticks his dick in other women in front of her, she should lighten up.
Posted by Lipstick_Kitty on October 28, 2009 at 11:20 AM · Report this
Jaymz 34
I'm with Urgutha Forka on this one - simple and not really worth the effort to respond. A palate cleanser for Dan, I guess.
Posted by Jaymz on October 28, 2009 at 11:23 AM · Report this
35
I advocate that you forward the information on to the police. If there is even a sliver of a chance that this email is real than there is a very real chance that there are minors out there who are at risk of being sexually abused. If you cannot prove for certain that this is the case, please allow law enforcement or child welfare authorities to do so for you.
Posted by Ms.Badu on October 28, 2009 at 11:30 AM · Report this
Karl42 36
Once or twice a month for 24 months equals 24-48 different arguments about the SAME THING.

This sounds like one of those problems that won't go away, mo matter how long the relationship lasts, and grows over time. For whatever reason, you two are just not compatible. Drop him.
Posted by Karl42 on October 28, 2009 at 11:39 AM · Report this
37
I'm with Dan, though--if the sex and divinity are worth it, keep him and get over it. At least he does it in front of you and not sneakily. Maybe to be extra passive aggressive you should suggest that the next time he sees someone he thinks is hot y'all should have a threesome. eh? eh? Or you could actually want a threesome. Maybe that'd make everything a-ok.
Posted by lalagato on October 28, 2009 at 11:55 AM · Report this
38
I agree with 30. Chatting/doing wall posts on Facebook isn't "right in front of" someone, unless you're ignoring your partner to type on your computer whilst out on a date. And talking to someone while you're drunk isn't automatically hardcore flirting -- having a few drinks can facilitate social interaction, even if you're not out trying to get laid. Everyone should be allowed to make new opposite-sex friends, & keep up with existing opposite-sex friends, even while in a couple. Relationships would be hellish if you had to constantly monitor all interactions with every other person for possible traces of flirtiness, and if every online conversation was a TERRIBLE BETRAYAL.

The letter writer says altering her attitude would be easier than changing the dude's behavior, so why not work on that? The fact that these interactions hurt her feelings don't automatically mean they're out of line. Some people's jealousy sensors are set very high, & they can get their feelings hurt just by hearing about their partner's exes or harmless celebrity crushes. That doesn't mean those people are bad people, but they may need to work on reining in their jealousy. Boyfriend's behavior may actually improve if he doesn't feel so constrained/monitored.
Posted by Gudrun Brangwen on October 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM · Report this
39
I agree with Emily (the first poster). I feel sad when it gets all into relationships and no sex. Boo.
Posted by AlexSW1 on October 28, 2009 at 12:16 PM · Report this
40
The first letter says nothing about child abuse. Where is everyone getting that idea? It says the woman is to introduce them to sex (that is, they haven't been already) on their respective birthdays (that is, when they become of age).

The letter is talking about consensual introduction of sex. When I have kids, I'd like to find a way to consensually introduce them to sex as well, when they're old enough.

Anyone here who thinks the first letter is scary or abusive is reading their own ideas into it. It doesn't talk at all about non-consensual sex.
Posted by J5676 on October 28, 2009 at 1:49 PM · Report this
41
WHAT?! Dan, the first response, great.

The second response sucked. She isn't passive aggressive. She's told him for 2 YEARS his behavior bothers her, straight to his face, and he still does it. What she wants is respect for her feelings. It's not like his behavior is ingrained, it's just disrespectful to her. (imagine if she'd be saying she wanted him to stop sucking her toes for 2 years, and he wouldn't do it.)
Going ONLINE to flirt with someone is fucked up! He's seeking out people he doesn't know to flirt with, and I see why that bothers her.
Since he refuses to acknowledge or respect her feelings in this area, I imagine he does it in other areas too. She needs to tell him she's not comfortable with the ridiculous flirting, and if he doesn't stop, she can either stop doing what he likes in bed (so he can plead with her 2x/month) and get a taste of his own medicine, or break up. I vote break up.

Peace.
Posted by EmilyAlso on October 28, 2009 at 2:02 PM · Report this
42
You ask a guy to stop flirting with other girls and disrespecting you and he responds with fine, I'll just stop having any girls who are friends! People with this negative IQ can't be talked to. Just dump him and find someone you can have a real conversation with, with no strawman BS.
Posted by Karey on October 28, 2009 at 2:19 PM · Report this
43
#1- Ugh. To echo a previous comment- wish I could unread that first one, whether it's made up or not. Creepy, creepy, creepy. Might not be a fake, though, unfortunately. Been talking to a guy online who has made some colorful comments that had me wondering if I should be concerned. I'm not gullible or stupid, it's just that it's not clear if I should be concerned or not. He was borderline inappropriate and maybe he just has some unresolved issues. It's not always easy to tell whether a person means any harm or not. If NTC is for real, at least she she found that there was a serious problem out sooner than later- Now she can dtmfa and call the cops asap.

#2- Not a strong enough letter to make up the difference for having to read the first one.

Look forward to reading Dan each week and this one was just foul. I usually enjoy it so much. Hoping that the podcast will be better.
Posted by Citizen's Arrest on October 28, 2009 at 2:28 PM · Report this
44
"The first letter says nothing about child abuse. Where is everyone getting that idea? It says the woman is to introduce them to sex (that is, they haven't been already) on their respective birthdays (that is, when they become of age)."

The LW herself points out that the guy never said at what age. For all you or anyone else knows, the birthday in question was their next one, making them 13 and 15. Not child abuse per se but underage. See "Polanski, Roman".

Let's say that the putative guy meant when each turned 18. Wouldn't you want a little say in who you lost your virginity with, or would you be totally OK with your dad arranging it with your stepmother 50+ years your senior?

Thought so.
Posted by CleverScreenName on October 28, 2009 at 3:14 PM · Report this
45
Whoever is at fault, (and I say both,) HIO's guy isn't going to change. If he were interested in respecting her feelings they wouldn't be having this conversation AGAIN.

I wouldn't call her passive aggressive; she's not being passive at all. But she might be a nag.

The first letter? I'm going to go wash my eyeballs now.

@#40, did you miss "if I wake up horny I should go to one of the boys' rooms and "grind my cunt into his face and fuck the boy." And that the boys have been "trained from an early age?" If true, and I dearly hope not, that means they've been sexually abused from an early age.
Posted by Nick_38 on October 28, 2009 at 3:20 PM · Report this
46
HIO is definitely getting abused in her relationship; he is doing something that hurts her, he knows it hurts her, and he keeps doing it. It's the emotional equivalent of backhanding her and then saying it's her fault. Either he needs to stop acting like he's still single or she needs to DTMFA. I would vote for the latter since he obviously doesn't understand concepts like "boundaries" or "respect" or "not being a douchebag".
Posted by Yawgmoth on October 28, 2009 at 3:22 PM · Report this
47
@40, 44

CleverScreenName, you forgot to mention that the father wants geriatric stepmom to wake up the kids by grinding her cunt in their faces. That suggests no one is waiting for the kids to turn 18... and it doesn't sound particularly consensual. Most 12 year olds don't want to be up to their ears in granny's pussy when they wake up. I just hope that letter was a fake.
Posted by grossgrossgross on October 28, 2009 at 3:22 PM · Report this
48
That first letter was possibly the most disgusting thing I've read in an advice column. It also managed to smear shit all over my favorite sexual deviancy - kukcholdree.
Posted by darslangly on October 28, 2009 at 3:43 PM · Report this
49
@44: Polanski drugged and raped a girl while she was screaming "no". The letter doesn't say to rape them. When people talk about sex, we should assume it's consensual unless they indicate otherwise.

Of course I would have wanted a say in losing my virginity, but I'd at least appreciate the offer to have sex.

@45: He's already indicated that he wants her to wait for their birthdays to take their virginity. So no waking up with an offer for sex. And waking someone up with cunt in the face is an offer of sex, not rape.

"trained" does not mean "sexually abused". The "training" could mean verbal sex education to prepare them for when it's time.

@47: The age of consent in the US is usually 16, though it depends on the state. And yes, most teenage boys think about sex a lot and are very interested in opportunities to have sex. I know, I was one not too long ago.

Again, it's clear that this letter is nothing more than a wish to consensually introduce sex to kids, when they're ready and old enough. Talking about calling the police is way premature at this point.
Posted by J5676 on October 28, 2009 at 5:01 PM · Report this
50
Dan's advice to letter #2 sucks. I don't think this girl is being passive aggressive at all! She's tried to communicate issues that bother her, and he doesn't care and doesn't make any changes. His behavior is hurtful and disrespectful. He's a jerk. DTMFA!

Letter #1 is a fake.
Posted by Real_Wisdom on October 28, 2009 at 6:38 PM · Report this
51
No No No on the second response. If that jack-ass doesn't care that he's hurting her, and fails to acknowledge that he has done anything wrong, DTMFA.
Perhaps she is insecure. Why would that be? 30 consecutive posts? Flirting constantly with other people? Won't talk to her for a day or 2? ARe you kidding?
It doesn't matter what he looks like. Fuck him. Move on.
Surprised at Dan's response.
Posted by STLJoy on October 28, 2009 at 6:54 PM · Report this
52
Eh, for number two, I don't think he's a jerk, and I don't think she's passive aggressive. They are just two people who want different things out of their relationship and they're both too stubborn to compromise. So they're probably better off going their separate ways.

I think a lot of the replies from people blaming one or the other are just replaying their own past issues.
Posted by El Brucio on October 28, 2009 at 7:06 PM · Report this
53
We don't know enough, but I don't think HIO's letter is necessarily DTMFA, but "dump your boyfriend".

By saying it's all in her head, yes, that's kind of asshole-ish, but the rest doesn't have to be.

I'm very flirty and touchy-feely with my guy friends, but I would never "cheat" on someone I'm dating. I'm clear on my definition of "cheat," but the guy I'm dating needs to agree.

Some people are uncomfortable with their SO's spending time alone with another member of the opposite sex. Some are okay with that, but uncomfortable with hugging/cuddling. Some are okay with their SOs making out with other people, as long as there is no sex. And so on.

I think HIO needs to find someone who has similar opinions on what is/isn't okay. I don't think we know enough to say that the bf is at fault, just that this isn't right, and it should have been noticed about 40 fights ago.
Posted by Ally17 on October 28, 2009 at 7:11 PM · Report this
54
HIO, he is doing something he knows will hurt you *right in front of you*. He is not sneaking around, he is doing it AT you. Seriously girl, this guy is enjoying controlling you - he is seeing just how much he can hurt you and you STILL want to be with him.
He is a manipulative, controlling douche, and you give him exactly what he wants.
Yes, he will change, he will get worse. I bet the things he has been doing have been getting worse over time already.
DTMFA.
Posted by tetrapod on October 28, 2009 at 7:16 PM · Report this
55
Yawn. Where's Dan's blog?
Posted by notclever on October 28, 2009 at 7:46 PM · Report this
56
"And waking someone up with cunt in the face is an offer of sex, not rape."

@49, are you insane?

Rape = being subjected to sexual actions you did not consent to.

When, exactly, when you wake up with a face full of someone else's private parts, is there consent?
Posted by TB on October 28, 2009 at 8:11 PM · Report this
57
That first letter sounds like a troll.
Posted by snarkycat on October 28, 2009 at 8:19 PM · Report this
58
That first letter sounds like a troll.
Posted by snarkycat on October 28, 2009 at 8:21 PM · Report this
59
@49

"When people talk about sex, we should assume it's consensual unless they indicate otherwise."

Not so much when the sex in question is between children and adults. Sorry dude, but the (hopefully bogus) letter makes it clear that these boys are meant to be sexually abused. You can't "introduce" your kids to sex by forcing their aged stepmother on them; that constitutes sexual abuse. This is so painfully obvious that I think you have to be a troll, because I don't think anyone is really so stupid to think this is ok. You mention your own kids-- I hope you never have any.
Posted by Grossgrossgross on October 28, 2009 at 8:26 PM · Report this
60
@56: The way I read the letter, the cunt in the face is intended as an offer of sex after the boys have already agreed to this. This is clear because the letter discusses waiting for the boys' birthdays to have them lose their virginities, so the offer of sex would have to be after this, after which the boys (by that time of legal age) have presumably agreed to this.

@59: The comment in the letter about waiting for the boys' birthdays makes it clear that the sex is to be legal and consensual. Even if the boys are slightly under the legal age, the sex still appears to be intended to be consensual.

Nowhere in the letter does it mention "forcing" anyone upon anyone. I don't think forcing sex upon anyone is ok, nor do I see any evidence that the man in question thinks so.

It is not at all obvious to me that the letter talks about abuse; quite the contrary. Different people can have different interpretations of a letter without either being stupid or a troll.
Posted by J5676 on October 28, 2009 at 8:51 PM · Report this
61
@49

If the proposed situation was that of a 68-year-old man waking up horny in the middle of the night and going to the bedroom of his 12 or 14-year-old stepdaughter to rub his cock in her face until she woke up, would you consider that closer to "an offer for consensual sex", or rape?
Posted by RoseX on October 28, 2009 at 8:58 PM · Report this
62
@61: My understanding of the letter is that the woman would wait until after she took their virginity, after they were of age, to rub her cunt in their face, and that she would only do this with their consent.

The situation you describe would only be comparable if the stepdaughter was of age, had already had consensual sex with the man, and was ok with being woken in such a manner. Otherwise, it's closer to rape. However, there are different concerns with teenage girls than there are with teenage boys.
Posted by J5676 on October 28, 2009 at 9:03 PM · Report this
63
@J5676
We are talking about a woman that would be (assuming age of consent is 16) 69 and then 72, and their stepmother. This father (if he exists) practices "familial nudity" with the his young sons. He says that he wants a cuckold lifestyle, which would indicate that he wants to know about these sexual encounters. How can you sit there and go "oh, it doesn't sound too bad, he's just being a concerned parent, he has trained his 12yo son in sex...I'm sure it's all perfectly innocent"?
I don't think people are jumping the gun indicating that this letter is effed up, and this guy sounds like a sick pervert child absuser. Again, this is if he exists, because I really, really, really hope he doesn't.
Posted by GR on October 28, 2009 at 9:14 PM · Report this
64
@60

What the FUCK is wrong with you?? As for your first idea, NO, this is not clear. This is absolutely NOT CLEAR. Firstly, it is your presumption that the cunt-grinding-on-face thing is wanted by the father to be an offer of (penetrative) sex to the boys. The letter says nothing about this, all it indicates is that he gets off on the idea of his elderly wife grinding her cunt on the faces of his sleeping children - it doesn't indicate what he might expect comes after that. And why do you think that a boy would have had to lose his virginity before he could be woken up with a step-parent's genitals being rubbed against him?

"Nowhere in the letter does it mention 'forcing' anyone upon anyone."

This left me speechless. Forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but waking up a child by rubbing your genitals on his or her face is NOT CONSENSUAL SEX. It is forced, and it is sexual abuse.

You have a profoundly chilling idea of the meaning of consent.

You seem to 'presume' rather a lot. The most sexually twisted mind would have a hard time making the leaps and filling in the gaps that you do.

And did you think that maybe, yes, a father who thinks about when, how, and with whom to introduce his adolescent sons to the idea of sex is just trying to make their experience safe and informed, but a man who discusses in detail with an internet date how he wants her to participate sexually in their enlightenment of his children - well, that there's something just a *little*... creepily forward about that? Didja?
Posted by RoseX on October 28, 2009 at 9:23 PM · Report this
65
@62

NO!!! The situation I described would NOT only be comparable if the stepdaughter was of age, because the letter says nothing about the father indicating that he wanted this to happen only after his wife took his sons virginity!

Oh my God. This exchange is making my skin crawl.

Dan, Dan, please say something to this creepy man (I assume he is a man because I believe a woman would have a more nuanced understanding of consent). I am not going to make any more comments to this person. I am going to take a deep shudder, close down the window and then try to visualise drenching my mind in hand-sanitiser. Bruuughh.
Posted by RoseX on October 28, 2009 at 9:30 PM · Report this
66
@62

NO!!! The situation I described would NOT only be comparable if the stepdaughter was of age, because the letter says nothing about the father indicating that he wanted this to happen only after his wife took his sons virginity, and furthermore, which birthdays he intended the semi-Oedipal situations to be a present for!

Oh my God. This exchange is making my skin crawl.

Dan, Dan, please say something to this creepy man (I assume he is a man because I believe a woman would have a more nuanced understanding of consent). I am not going to make any more comments to this person. I am going to take a deep shudder, close down the window and then try to visualise drenching my mind in hand-sanitiser. Bruuughh.
Posted by RoseX on October 28, 2009 at 9:33 PM · Report this
67
Just one last thing: I'm sorry if "I assume that a woman would have a more nuanced idea of consent" offended any men reading this; I did not mean to implicate you all with this fuck-up.

And sorry for the double post. The second one was meant to be the right one.
Posted by RoseX on October 28, 2009 at 9:36 PM · Report this
Nova 68
Oh my goodness: @49 -- "When people talk about sex, we should assume it's consensual unless they indicate otherwise."

Actually, it is the other way around. We should assume it is not consensual unless someone indicates otherwise. If not, than I can go up to a person that is passed out and fuck them, because hey, it's consensual unless they indicate otherwise!
Also, this guy is a creep and he "trained his kids" to want a motherly figure to fuck them. This guy also fantasizes about involving his kids in his sexual fantasy ... I am going to assume, given the context, that he wouldn't mind having his kids raped before age of consent.

49 said: "Waking someone up with cunt in the face is an offer of sex, not rape."

This is just your lack of understanding in what constitutes sexual assault. To commit sexual assault, you only need to violate another person's sexual integrity. You do not actually need to penetrate anyone in order to be charged with sexual assault. Frotteurism is the most common form of sexual assault, yet all it involves is touching. If shoving your cunt in someone's face is only an "offer for sex" and is not sexual assault, than I would have had hundreds of horny guys shove their dick in my face at clubs, because apparently they're allowed to do that. No, no and no ... you need consent for something so obviously sexual.

Maybe Dan, myself and others are just old school, but I'm pretty convinced that "training" your kids to want sex with a woman that represents their mother will traumatize and send the kids a wrong message. Also, since when do we ever call sex education "training"? I also think Dan should have forwarded this letter to the police, despite the likelihood that it is fake.

That was a bizarre rant. I never thought I'd have to defend the idea of disallowing adults (stepmothers, at that) from abusing youths. I guess anything can happen over the intarwebs ... especially if I am arguing with a troll.
More...
Posted by Nova on October 28, 2009 at 10:10 PM · Report this
69
@68:

We are in agreement that rubbing against someone without their consent is sexual assault. Of course you can't fuck a passed out person without consent. I am not defending abuse.

But, if someone tells you "I am going to have sex with Sue tomorrow" we should assume it was consensual, unless indicated otherwise. That's what's going on in the letter.

I don't know whether the letter was real, or what's going on in this guy's head. But the suggestion of waiting for their birthdays suggests waiting for them to be of legal age. (why else would you wait for a birthday?)

And if the boys had consensual sex with this woman when they became of age, and if they were ok with it, then her rubbing her cunt in their face would be an offer of sex and perfectly acceptable. That's what I meant by my comment.

I would hope that people can discuss and debate the Savage Love letters, and disagree on them, without resorting to calling people trolls or other names.
Posted by J5676 on October 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM · Report this
70
@68:

We are in agreement that rubbing against someone without their consent is sexual assault. Of course you can't fuck a passed out person without consent. I am not defending abuse.

But, if someone tells you "I am going to have sex with Sue tomorrow" we should assume it was consensual, unless indicated otherwise. That's what's going on in the letter.

I don't know whether the letter was real, or what's going on in this guy's head. But the suggestion of waiting for their birthdays suggests waiting for them to be of legal age. (why else would you wait for a birthday?)

And if the boys had consensual sex with this woman when they became of age, and if they were ok with it, then her rubbing her cunt in their face would be an offer of sex and perfectly acceptable. That's what I meant by my comment.

I would hope that people can discuss and debate the Savage Love letters, and disagree on them, without resorting to calling people trolls or other names.
Posted by J5676 on October 28, 2009 at 10:33 PM · Report this
71
@J5676

News Flash, the age of consent is almost always 18. However there is a flexiability with it where a 16 year old (in some states Washington is one, California is 18 or bust) can have sex with someone up to FIVE years older, same goes for 17 year olds. 69 is more then five years older of 16. Furthermore the letter did nothing to indicate that she was waiting until their legal birthday to grind herself into their faces. He said whenever she's horny. Also, dont you see this as incest anyway? She may not be related by blood to them but legally become their mother by marrying their father and then having sex with her? Can we say ew? I think we all can. Im hoping this letter is a major troll and just in case it wasnt, Dan forwarded the letter off to make sure. Finally, its different for teenage girls then for boys? NO There is NO double standard when it comes to rape. Men can be raped just as easily as Women. Rape is Rape whether men or women, between homo or hetero couples, young or old. ANYTHING.
Posted by imamilkshake on October 28, 2009 at 10:48 PM · Report this
72
@J5676 - But, if someone tells you "I am going to have sex with Sue tomorrow" we should assume it was consensual, unless indicated otherwise. That's what's going on in the letter.

But in this case, it's "I am going to have sex with Sue's 12 year old son tomorrow". I don't think we can assume that means a 12 year old is going to have consensual sex with the 68 year old girlfriend of his dad's.

"And if the boys had consensual sex with this woman when they became of age, and if they were ok with it, then her rubbing her cunt in their face would be an offer of sex and perfectly acceptable." -- So because you consent to have sex with someone previously (this is assuming a 12 year old can consent to have sex with a 68 year old), this means that you can't be sexually assaulted by that person? This is the SAME argument rapists often use--that slut had sex with me lots of times before, so it doesn't count!
Posted by Rose Selavy on October 28, 2009 at 11:10 PM · Report this
73
Well even if the author of letter #1 isn't a troll, J5676 definitely is.
Posted by snorkelkitten on October 28, 2009 at 11:21 PM · Report this
74
YUCK!! I'm with kim in Portland (@11)! Please, God, don't let the letter from NTC be just another shit sandwich!

Child rape, date rape---any kind of rape---is not a joke!

Right as rain as usual, Dan. Kudos again for an awesome column!
Posted by wileEcoyote on October 28, 2009 at 11:57 PM · Report this
75
YUCK!!! I'm with kim in Portland---let's hope that NTC's letter was indeed, a shit sandwich! Rape of any kind is no joke!

Right on as always, Dan! Kudos.
Posted by wileEcoyote on October 28, 2009 at 11:59 PM · Report this
76
Sorry---the computer was slow. Please disregard the repeated comments.
Posted by wileEcoyote on October 29, 2009 at 12:01 AM · Report this
77

@71: The letter said she would take the boys' virginity in a hotel room on their birthday. To take someone's virginity, you can't have previously had sex with him. It also said that after she moved in with the family, she could grind her pussy in the boys' faces and have sex with them. Thus, she would only grind her pussy in their faces after their birthday.

I agree that rape is rape, whether male or female. My comment about it being different with teenage boys than with girls was meant about consensual sex.

By the way, the age of consent is 16 in the majority of states, with some flexibility for people 14-16 with someone only a few years older. That is, someone 16 could have sex with someone 60 in the majority of states (but not all, as you correctly point out). Look up age of consent laws online if you don't believe me. Dan actually took a question about this in Savage Love at one time.

@72: Of course you can be sexually assaulted by someone you had consensual sex with previously, and I never said otherwise. But if you consent to have someone wake you up with sex, than it's not an assault. I've woken my girlfriend up with sex before, and she has told me beforehand that she's ok with it. That's not assault. That's why I said "IF they were ok with it" in my comment.

12 is too young to have consensual sex (both legally and ethically). But the letter didn't say that she would have sex with a 12 year old. It said after his birthday. It seems likely this is referring to when he becomes "of age". Otherwise, why wait until someone's birthday?

I'm really not trying to be a troll. I'm trying explain my view of the letter clearly and politely. I guess some people are so squicked out and disturbed by the letter that they (a) take the worst possible interpretation and (b) get extremely offended at even discussing it.
More...
Posted by J5676 on October 29, 2009 at 12:09 AM · Report this
78
This is the most bizarre conversation I've ever read. There isn't even a close second.

All this crap about ages and consent - if anything in that letter is real (which I'm pretty convinced it isn't), it's about SONS INVOLVED IN THEIR FATHER'S SEX LIFE! He's a cuckold. He gets off on his partner having sex with other people. If she fucks his sons, he's going to get sexual pleasure from the act. A man getting sexual pleasure in any way that involves his sons of any age or with any degree of willingness is illegal, disgusting and guaranteed to get every single person involved more fucked up than they already are.

Funny, my father has never tried to procure sex for me, even when I was a teenager. I'll have to ask him why that is next time we talk.
Posted by screwball12 on October 29, 2009 at 12:11 AM · Report this
79
And for God's sake, Dan should definitely inform the cops. Jeezus!
Posted by screwball12 on October 29, 2009 at 12:19 AM · Report this
80
@78: I think you're right that the suggestion of incest here is what's causing the biggest reaction, not the question of whether this is consensual or how old the boys will be.

Just curious, would you feel the same way about a mother and a daughter? Say they're both attractive, adults, consenting, and wanting to have sex with you (separately or together). Or two sisters? There's a lot of twin sister porn out there.
Posted by J5676 on October 29, 2009 at 12:34 AM · Report this
81
HIO: Crikey, you guys are just kids. It doesn't matter how hot or dreamy he is. He's an ass and he probably won't change. But you're acting like a weak, insecure little loser. Stop it now or you're going to become a weak, insecure, naggy older woman who's a drag to be around. Walk away. It will hurt at first, but it's the most effective way to grow some self-respect.

I'm concerned that J5676 is actually the wealthy, educated man in the first letter. Which I hope is fake.
Posted by Kristen on October 29, 2009 at 12:41 AM · Report this
82
@81: Nope, I'm a poor 25 year old student. And I think the letter is pretty weird. It just doesn't seem like child abuse to me and I was surprised that Dan read it that way, and then so many commentators read it that way also! I wouldn't have thought of it like that, though I guess it's possible.
Posted by J5676 on October 29, 2009 at 12:46 AM · Report this
83
No, J, I'm very confidently against incest no matter what the combination. Parents shouldn't involve themselves in their children's sex lives on any level. They certainly shouldn't screen potential lovers for their willingness to fuck their kids, or even consider how their children should lose their virginity years ahead of the fact. There's no way that someone who openly fantasizes about such things - sharing it with women they hope to meet and bed - can have healthy boundaries.

Sisters? I dunno. It's lower on the creepy factor, I suppose, but I've studied family psychology, and I don't think it's healthy for any immediate family members to be sexually involved with each other. The level of enmeshment alone would be frightening. There isn't sister porn that addresses how it would impact the relationship between the sisters after the fact.
Posted by screwball12 on October 29, 2009 at 12:58 AM · Report this
84
No, J, I'm very confidently against incest no matter what the combination. Parents shouldn't involve themselves in their children's sex lives on any level. They certainly shouldn't screen potential lovers for their willingness to fuck their kids, or even consider how their children should lose their virginity years ahead of the fact. There's no way that someone who openly fantasizes about such things - sharing it with women they hope to meet and bed - can have healthy boundaries.

Sisters? I dunno. It's lower on the creepy factor, I suppose, but I've studied family psychology, and I don't think it's healthy for any immediate family members to be sexually involved with each other. The level of enmeshment alone would be frightening. There isn't sister porn that addresses how it would impact the relationship between the sisters after the fact.
Posted by screwball12 on October 29, 2009 at 12:59 AM · Report this
85
@83: There's got to be a middle ground between creepy incest fantasies and no involvement with children's sexuality. At one point fathers would take their sons to brothels for their first time. I don't think that's the best way of handling it, but part of a parent's job is helping their kids grow up and that includes helping their kids develop a healthy sexuality.

Ideally, there'd be some sort of sex education teacher or sex surrogate who could help teenagers through the difficult time of learning about their sexuality; someone who could teach them about sex and relationships consensually and lovingly.

Though there's something really creepy about the incest/cuckold factor, I liked this letter (at least my charitable interpretation of it) because I liked the idea of a father trying to find someone to teach his kids about sex and introduce them to it. I am not supporting rape or child abuse, or forcing anything on the kids. But I know it would have been helpful for me to have an older woman to get to know me, teach me about sex, and guide me through adolescence.
Posted by J5676 on October 29, 2009 at 1:14 AM · Report this
86
If we take it all at face value, this man wasn't teaching his children about sex. He was involving them in his personal sexual fantasy, and suggesting involving them in his sex life with his wife under their roof. There's a huge, huge difference. Having sex with a wife to cuckold the husband is being involved in the sex life with the couple, not just the wife. Sorry, J, this letter is a great heaping pile of wrong.

I'm all for answering questions and having the "birds and bees" talk, giving advice, buying condoms even, but beyond that, I'd be against it. There's a point when it's up to the teenager to embark on their own exploration. I think maneuvering the joys and perils of early sex is one of those things that defines our growth to independence from our parents.

And anyway, I thought the presence of adults was supposed to PREVENT us from having sex. Usually, most of us don't need much encouragement. More involvement of my parents was the last thing I wanted. Ewww...
Posted by screwball12 on October 29, 2009 at 1:41 AM · Report this
87
@86: Yeah, I know the letter involves the guy being involved it. But I did like the other part of the situation.

What if the guy wasn't watching or anything? What if he just knew about it, and that's all, and he got off on the thought of it? Would that bother you less?

I didn't mean that the parents would be directly involved in my ideal scenario. No, kids don't want their parents involved, but if their parents found an attractive older girl to be their friend and get to know them and start dating them while teaching them, I doubt many kids would object. They could still maneuver the joys and perils of sex without their parents, just with a little help and guidance.
Posted by J5676 on October 29, 2009 at 2:10 AM · Report this
88
I think you were a bit insensitive in the second letter. That guy is a total prick if he doesn't realize what he's doing is hurting his girlfriend. How could she *not* feel paranoid and insecure? She has no way to know where innocent flirting ends and not-so-innocent cheating begins.

As for the first one, just eeugh, nothing I can say hasn't been said in these comments already. I hope its fake too, but I'd err on the side of caution and forward it to the police anyway.
Posted by Reptyle216 on October 29, 2009 at 4:27 AM · Report this
89
Sorry but for the first time in the several years I've read your column I feel cheated. The first letter, fake or not (which I believe it is) didn't even deserve to be printed and the second letter should have been mailed to Dear Abby. Now I have to wait an entire week in hopes of getting a REAL Savage fix!
Posted by cMarks on October 29, 2009 at 5:36 AM · Report this
90
I'm with the majority on the second letter: her boyfriend is a controlling dirt-bag who doesn't care about her feelings. I highly doubt flirting is the only place he's doing this, and it's only going to get worse. Dump him, yo.
Posted by Nikki in MN on October 29, 2009 at 5:52 AM · Report this
91
J5676, I hope you're not in any sort of occupation that brings you in regular contact with other people's children. You've got some sick notions in your head about teens and sex.
Posted by My Name Here on October 29, 2009 at 6:55 AM · Report this
92
@91: Sounds like you didn't read what I wrote, or misunderstood it. If you read what I wrote carefully, please elaborate.
Posted by J5676 on October 29, 2009 at 7:29 AM · Report this
93
"The letter is talking about consensual introduction of sex. When I have kids, I'd like to find a way to consensually introduce them to sex as well, when they're old enough."

Hello J5676, boundaries? It's not your place to introduce your children to sex. It's your place to educate them about it and make sure they know how to protect themselves both physically and emotionally. Then you back the hell off and let them make their own choices. Sex is a very personal thing, and no healthy person wants their dad to have that level of involvement in their sex lives.

BTW, when you speak of your future children, are you just thinking of your sons, or do you plan to find some older man to "introduce" your daughters as well?
Posted by possible, not likely on October 29, 2009 at 7:48 AM · Report this
luvzhappyboy 94
Re: NTC... you need to stop actively LOOKING for a new husband, woman! Take up a hobby or take a class that men enjoy and meet REAL men, not the fake shithead with the two boys. How did you get to 68 with that little sense?
Posted by luvzhappyboy on October 29, 2009 at 8:56 AM · Report this
95
I need a shower after that first letter- Bullshit or horrifyingly true, either way, it's unspeakably icky that such scenarios could be in anyone's mind and the letter should be forwarded to the authorities. the extremely slim chance that there are two adolescent children at risk is reason enough to take that step.

Bravo to Dan for his answer on this one.

As for letter 2- Puleeeeese.
Silly little girl!
If your partner routinely behaves in ways that you find hurtful, it's time to cut him loose and seek out a new partner who shares your ideas of what is and is not ok within a relationship.

Without hearing his side, I can't make any comment about who might be right or wrong, but there does not have to be a "bad guy" for a relationship to simply not work.
Posted by TotallySquicked on October 29, 2009 at 9:03 AM · Report this
96
OK J, let me just address one of your points. You insist that the whole birthday thing means they intend to wait until the kids are of age. I think you are leaping to conclusions. Perhaps that is what they meant, or perhaps they were just waiting for the next birthday. Birthdays are meant to be special days, you know, it doesn't necessarily mean their 16th birthday, or whatever. AND even if they wait until the kid is 16, the sex will likely be coerced. If dad wants his little boys to get fucked by granny stepmom, he can probably make it happen. It sounds like all the "training" these kids have received counts as years of sexual abuse, which poisons any further "consent" they give in respect to their role as tools of their father's sex life. Sorry dude, but it blows my mind that you could read that letter as anything other than criminal and off-the-charts creepy. The letter writer herself wrote because she was concerned about abusing the kids. That's why I called you a troll earlier, because it's sort of incomprehensible to me.

Again, I still think/hope the letter is total bullshit.
Posted by grossgrossgross on October 29, 2009 at 10:24 AM · Report this
97
J5676 - In case you hadn't noticed, the first letter stated that this guy's kids have "been trained from an early age to also live this lifestyle". Meaning that IF the letter is real (I doubt it), the kids were raised in a way that would be considered child abuse in most states, from an early age. They would have been taught that this kind of sexual stuff was normal, acceptable, or unavoidable BEFORE they were old enough to consent. Basically, this guy would have raised his kids to be willing sex slaves to fulfill his own fantasies. It isn't really qualitatively different from if he had raised his daughters to expect to perform blowjobs on daddy - even if this training somehow never involved the actual, physical act of sex, if you "train" a kid to expect this kind of thing from an early age, true consent would never really be applicable even if you waited until they were of legal age.

Even IF the letter somehow implied that cunt grinding and virginity taking was only to happen in a consensual way, this guy would have been BRAINWASHING HIS KIDS to expect/like/accept this kind of thing. Therefore, it is not really consent. It is abused kids being subjected to further abuse. It also begs the question of how one would "train" one's kids to expect this kind of thing - any answer would imply abuse, or at the very least, highly inappropriate conduct. But if the kids truly expect this kind of thing, it's likely that they've already been experiencing it. When I read the letter, I assumed that the cunt grinding was a demand for pussy eating (after all, he didn't say to sit on their cock's). Daddy probably considers penetrative sex to be losing one's virginity, so there's no reason to assume his boy's wouldn't be expected to perform in other ways before that, and probably have if they've been truly trained to be a part of this guy's "lifestyle."
More...
Posted by DrReality on October 29, 2009 at 10:42 AM · Report this
98
"I liked the idea of a father trying to find someone to teach his kids about sex and introduce them to it."

Which is why we're all disturbed by your responses to this letter, almost as much as we're troubled by the letter itself. Don't do that. Please never do that.

"Hey, what's that sound? Oh, it's just my geriatric wife having sex with my teenage son. God that's hot. I think I'll masturbate."
Posted by screwball12 on October 29, 2009 at 11:07 AM · Report this
robt vesco, jr. 99
I'm betting if HIO held back and didn't nag him JUST ONCE after he pulled the stupid flirting crap, he'd stop doing it. She doesn't like him disrespecting her, he doesn't like her telling him what to do.

Since she demonstrably doesn't really mind this sort of behavior, there's not much risk in giving my approach a try. She WOULD have to forgo her obvious pleasure in having the pre-fight "adult talk" with him that makes her feel superior.
Posted by robt vesco, jr. on October 29, 2009 at 11:12 AM · Report this
robt vesco, jr. 100
I'm betting if HIO held back and didn't nag him JUST ONCE after he pulled the stupid flirting crap, he'd stop doing it. She doesn't like him disrespecting her, he doesn't like her telling him what to do.

Since she demonstrably doesn't really mind this sort of behavior, there's not much risk in giving my approach a try. She WOULD have to forgo her obvious pleasure in having the pre-fight "adult talk" with him that makes her feel superior.
Posted by robt vesco, jr. on October 29, 2009 at 11:13 AM · Report this
robt vesco, jr. 101
I'm betting if HIO held back and didn't nag him JUST ONCE after he pulled the stupid flirting crap, he'd stop doing it. She doesn't like him disrespecting her, he doesn't like her telling him what to do.

Since she demonstrably doesn't really mind this sort of behavior, there's not much risk in giving my approach a try. She WOULD have to forgo her obvious pleasure in having the pre-fight "adult talk" with him that makes her feel superior.
Posted by robt vesco, jr. on October 29, 2009 at 11:13 AM · Report this
robt vesco, jr. 102
Sorry folks, the computer kept telling me there was a software error ...
Posted by robt vesco, jr. on October 29, 2009 at 11:14 AM · Report this
103
@47, I didn't forget, I was just trying not to reintroduce the image to my brain. Too late now...
Posted by CleverScreenName on October 29, 2009 at 12:09 PM · Report this
104
J5676: You need to check yourself ! Something is way off about you.
You wrote "... to consensually introduce sex to kids..." and many other disturbing things. Get counseling or take an "Am I a Danger to Children" survey in Cosmo or something.
Posted by ScaryOldeSpice on October 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM · Report this
105
The response to the first letter was the funniest thing I have read in a long time. Tears down my face! Want to see more than two letters, though!!
Posted by PostMyNote on October 29, 2009 at 12:54 PM · Report this
b1izzard 106
I'm thinking HIO's ass is the one going to get dumped.
Posted by b1izzard on October 29, 2009 at 2:32 PM · Report this
107
i suspect the first letter is not from a looney jacker, but from nutjob who thought they'd catch the immoral homo with their brilliant letter, which they could then use to say, "see, they are all baby rapers!"

i'll say, pedo-priest or -minister, as my first guess!
Posted by cranky on October 29, 2009 at 3:46 PM · Report this
108
oh, but i say still forward the letter to the police. someone needs a talking to from the authoritays.
Posted by cranky on October 29, 2009 at 3:50 PM · Report this
109
this is some conversation.

if i negotiate for anyone to fuck you without your consent, a sexual assault has taken place. age is a non-factor. our relationship to one another is a non-factor.

if a parent negotiates for their child to be fucked, even if the child is an adult, and even with the child's consent, that is nuts and an abusive relationship.

factor in being a minor, factor in being a parent, and well, not really much to say.
Posted by cranky on October 29, 2009 at 4:03 PM · Report this
Rob L 110
Dan, the first thing that occurred to me when I read the "cuckoldt lifestyle" letter is that you were being set up, "ACORN" style, but some right wing anti-sex bigot. If they didn't know you (and one assumes such people don't), they might have assumed that you would write a sympathetic letter which they could then use to expose you as a supporter of child abuse. This would strengthen their argument that gays and healthy sexuality in general are threats to children. The use of the term "lifestyle" makes me suspicious. That is how homophobes talk about gays; "in the gay lifestyle" because they think it demeans it as just a frivolous choice. As anyone who reads you regularly could have told them, you are very big on consent and protection of children, so it also strikes me, that the writer did not read your column regularly. We will probably never know who this writer really is, but I am deeply suspicious.
Posted by Rob L on October 29, 2009 at 6:56 PM · Report this
111
The first letter is a big fat ewwwwww even if the guy is only talking about the sick stuff in his head. Maybe we actually DO want him to talk about it so the letter can be forwarded to the authorities and "stepmom" and "dad" can both get a talking to.

And maybe "stepmom" is only the second lady's drunk boyfriend spinning some other reasons to DTMFA.

Even sicker, this is all fine palate cleanser since I just read an item in another paper about parents abusing their 4-year-old daughter.

By comparison with them, "stepmom" is a real pillar of responsible parenting.

Ewwwww
Posted by zzz on October 29, 2009 at 7:11 PM · Report this
Milbury 112
NTC: Please, for the sake of everything that is good and holy, DIAF. You've taken my passion for having sex with other mens' wives while they watch and masturbate and turned it into something impure and disturbing.

HIO: If his behaviour is so disturbing (and it sounds like a severe stumbling block), then DTMFA. But be careful, as you may be (accidentally) fulfilling one of Dan's credos: (paraphrased) When you dump the partner with a mild kink or pecadillo, beware meeting a partner with a more dangerous one. IOW, you may be trading an incorrigible flirt (whose behaviour, as written, comes across as mild if not necessarily harmless) for a man who'd *never, ever, ever* consider flirting with another woman in any sort of medium to which you have access. Instead, he'll just limit his "flirting" to low-cost Asian "massage therapists", the cleaner-looking prostitutes on the other side of the city, a student who looks up to him, any willing party with a penis and a pulse, or every single combination of the above flaws . But at least the "respectful" new guy won't dare do anything as crass as *parade* his extramarital relationships around his SO.

Seriously speaking, big talkers tend to be little doers. If I were in your shoes, I'd err on the side of caution and break up. I just hope that you don't pick a rebound guy who's the Bizarro version of your current BF. They have a tendency to live up to the "Bizarro" tag.
Posted by Milbury http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rLkEsoO6t0 on October 29, 2009 at 7:13 PM · Report this
113
Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your own emotions? It's a sign of maturity, and OIH sounds like she's got none of it. Her argument boils down to "since HE made me feel this way, it's up to HIM to change." I don't think her bf is any saint, it sounds like he knows exactly how to push her anger buttons and does so repeatedly. BUT they are HER buttons, which means it's HER problem and it's up to her to do something about it, not him.

Either way, they both have a lot of growing up to do.
Posted by some old nobodaddy on October 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM · Report this
114
@J5676 - You sound like an absolute nutjob. Isn't fucking your stepchildren, even if it's consensual and they're "of age", illegal? I would certainly call it incest. And having sexual fantasies about your wife fucking your children - I would also consider that highly incestuous. That is not a "healthy" introduction to sex, it's just wrong, wrong, wrong. There aren't enough words in the dictionary to describe how wrong it is. And they practice "familial nudity"? I know that some people are nudists and consider it harmless, but there is obviously a sexual context here.

Dan, could you PLEASE forward this email to the police? You can't be 100% certain that the letter is fake, and everyone has a moral obligation to report any suspicions of child abuse. And even if the letter IS fake, a police investigation would make this pervert think twice before posting any more of his perverted fantasies on the Internet.
Posted by Pandora on October 30, 2009 at 4:55 AM · Report this
115
OIH's boyfriend clearly doesn't even have any interest in her; if he did, he'd be finding ways to interact w/her & go places/do things w/her rather than waste hours every day flirting online.
Posted by wayne on October 30, 2009 at 6:49 AM · Report this
116
I know this is OT, but if anyone here lives in Virginia, please please PLEASE register & vote for Steve Shannon & Creigh Deeds. Ken Cuccinelli hates gay people ("it's not normal") and bitterly criticized the safe sex/date rape info forum @GMU as being "disgusting" and "promoting sexual promiscuity"; Bob McDonnell thinks gays "should be punished" and working women are "detrimental to the family"

No wonder Mary Cheney thinks this is a cool place to live! Lunatix!
Posted by wayne on October 30, 2009 at 6:55 AM · Report this
117
Washington's laws regarding sex with a minor are pretty specific - consent doesn't mean much.

As someone who works for CPS, I can say this: a letter without identfiying information (specifically names and location) of the children isn't going to screen in. However, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be forwarded to law enforcement.

Working with this stuff, if that letter is real, it's clearly sexual abuse - and chronic. Call it what you will "training" is the same as "grooming" and that's exactly what child sexual abusers do.
Posted by missktkat on October 30, 2009 at 10:33 AM · Report this
TheGoddessMaria 118
I'm curious if the gal in letter #2 is holding on to this "relationship" because of the guy's looks. Maybe she thinks she's never going to bang anyone as hot as this guy. My own opinion is that she can always touch herself to memories of the hot sex with no muss or fuss with the jerk! (and she needs a therapist to work on why she'd stay with someone who she's not happy with!)
Posted by TheGoddessMaria http://thegoddessmaria.com on October 30, 2009 at 9:19 PM · Report this
119
# 1- fake
# 2- dtmfa

Posted by tnat on October 31, 2009 at 6:17 AM · Report this
120
I am not sure what the laws are like where Dan lives. I do know that in Ontario, Canada (where I live) if there is a possibility that a child may be abused, even if not confirmed, a person who suspects has a legal obligation to to report to Child Welfare (CW).

It is up to CW & the police to investigate to determine whether or not abuse is happening.

Like many, I hope the letter was not real. And I don't know.
Posted by WAV on October 31, 2009 at 7:47 AM · Report this
121
#1- send the email to the police. it probably is fake.cover thy butt.

# 2- hio- get your whip out of the closet and beat him to orgasmic pleasure, or dtmfa- shit or get off the pot.
Posted by tnat on October 31, 2009 at 1:43 PM · Report this
122
I wouldn't say that the second lady is being passive aggressive or manipulative. I think Dan should have just ended with a good 'ol DTMFA.

For the first one, I would forward the email to the police just to be on the safe side. I would much rather they figure assure that it was all just a disturbing joke as opposed to letting this all slide and have it turn out otherwise...
Posted by Nixxy on October 31, 2009 at 8:38 PM · Report this
123
Who on earth says that they are "almost 68"?
Seven almost eight, seventeen almost eighteen.... maybe twenty-seven, almost twenty eight. But after that you stop saying how old you "almost" are.

That letter is just so wrong in like, seven, almost eight ways.
Posted by catscratchfever on November 1, 2009 at 1:23 AM · Report this
124
I was also in a relationship like HIO's. Granted, we don't know the whole truth . . . but it does sound like emotional abuse. Especially troubling to me is the part where the guy completely overreacts to what is a decently reasonable concern on the part of the women. His role in the relationship is to help his partner understand what's going on when she's concerned about something; going crazy and getting upset at least twice a month is not a good sign. I'd totally dump him and find a guy that's more worth my time -- they definitely exist!
Posted by elay on November 1, 2009 at 5:43 AM · Report this
125
Like commenter #124, I was ALSO in a relationship like this once. It is TEXTBOOK crazy-making behaviour. Guys like this use will even use Dan's response as a weapon, pointing at his answer and saying, "See? It's you who are the problem. Dan even says you're an insecure, passive-aggressive guilt tripper."

Dan's wrong, HIO. It is insulting to flirt with others in front of your partner. The purpose of that kind of behaviour is to subtly show you that you're WORTHLESS to him... to set the stage for other, more serious kinds of abuse later. I promise you that if you stay with this creep, you'll look back in five years and weep for all that lost time that you could have spent with a real man.

RUN FOR THE NEAREST EXIT.
Posted by Cut Your Losses on November 1, 2009 at 5:10 PM · Report this
126
The second response sucked. She isn't passive aggressive. She's told him for 2 YEARS his behavior bothers her, straight to his face, and he still does


And she still stays with him, clinging to some hope that if they argue about it one more time, he'll change.

OK, that's not passive-aggressive, that's just pathetic.
Posted by truthspeaker on November 1, 2009 at 9:12 PM · Report this
127
He flirts - that's all. Who does he love? Who is he with? Who does he fuck? YOU (if any of the answers aren't "you" - dump him).
You are basically just trying to control him. I've been described as a "natural flirt" - I don't set out to do it - it just comes naturally. There's nothing wrong with it - I love who I'm with (7 years now) and wouldn't do anything outside of flirting. It's flattering to flirt with someone you think is attractive and have them flirt back. It doesn't mean I love my partner any less.

Can you honestly say that when you're out and about and you see an attractive man that you don't smile or giggle? Same thing, honey. Don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise.

Quit controlling him and start flirting with men you find attractive. You'll soon learn that it's fun, you still love the man your with, and it makes you feel great when you feel a little insecure sometimes and a handsome man finds you attractive enough to flirt back with.

Posted by I Flirt 2 on November 2, 2009 at 7:39 AM · Report this
128
holy SHIT, BATMAN!!!! Fucking arrest the child abusing sickos already!!!!
Posted by clara pellar on November 2, 2009 at 10:58 AM · Report this
129
It's ironic that HIO is called "insecure" because it is the person who has to constantly reaffirm his/her sexual prowess by flirting who is REALLY insecure.

If your boyfriend flirts - especially when he knows it embarrasses or humiliates you - then he is telling you that he wants out of the relationship but he just doesn't have the balls to break it off. THAT'S passive-aggressive.

The advice given to HIO is totally ass-backwards. Crack a psych. text if plain common sense doesn't work for you.
Posted by Why Blame the Victim? on November 2, 2009 at 11:32 PM · Report this
130
"Why Blame the Victim," I think you nailed it. There's plenty of insecurity on both sides of that relationship, and they're bringing out the worst in each other. The best way to end the toxic behavior is to break up and figure out what the heck made this relationship seem so attractive in the first place. That goes for both of them.
Posted by My Name Here on November 3, 2009 at 6:28 AM · Report this
131
My only real response to the column and to the entertaining conversation afterwards is to say, according to Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Nearly Everything" incest is the only reason the human species (perhaps any) could be alive today, because, if you go back to the time of the Roman Empire, the number of partner pairings we each owe our existence to (parents, paternal/maternal grandparents, paternal/maternal great-grand grandparents etc. etc. etc for a 100 generations or so) exceeds the number of humans who have ever lived since humans evolved.

I think I got that right.

Anyway, if we've practised it since the Romans and before, I would bet we're practising it now considerably.

Why we aren't open about it, if that's the case, and how the stigma of incest evolved, is an interesting question.

The fact that there seems to be an obligation to oppose incest openly is more fascinating to me than whether someone actually supports it.

Given that, I can say I applaud J5676's openness about his point of view. Even if his views are wrong, there is something right about a willingness to deny a social obligation to feel one way or another about something.

One thing I'm sure of- we don't want to talk about incest, even though we do it. And if we don't want to talk about it, we can't have some people questioning that it's wrong, or parts of it are wrong.
Posted by tantratantrum on November 3, 2009 at 12:59 PM · Report this
132
People love being "victims," because it absolves them of any responsibility whatsoever. One person does not a "relationship" make - BY DEFINITION. EVEN in an abusive relationship, both parties are still responsible for their own actions, whether it's abuse, or tolerating abuse. It's still about power and control, and what you're WILLING to give up, for something else, whatever that may be. It always amazes me how people confuse "empowerment" with "blaming the victim." If you realize and utilize your power to affect a situation, then you can no longer claim "victim" status (and therefore there is no "victim" to "blame"), and bitch at everyone else in the world, EXCEPT yourself. That takes actual guts. And let's admit just it: most people in this world are sheep and cowards.

I think Dan nailed both cases, esp. the second one. Also, what 25-year-olds are doing bitching about FACEBOOK, is beyond me. They both sound like they have the emotional maturity of 8-year-olds. Grow the f*ck up.
Posted by power of one on November 3, 2009 at 2:38 PM · Report this
Knat 133
Between this cringe-worthy letter about a 67-year old woman grinding her withered reproductive bits on horny teenager's faces to wake them up and demand sex (something straight out of nightmares), and last week's podcast containing a call about an old nude dude model cumming while art students look on (whether true or not), I think I need to go vomit my brain onto the sidewalk. Thanks, Dan.
Posted by Knat on November 3, 2009 at 4:06 PM · Report this
134
@131

The reason incest shouldnt be done in ANY means aside from it just being sick and wrong is because inbreeding leads to things like mental retardation, and other birth defects. Look at pure bread dalmations? They are inbred and a very high percent of them come out deaf. The royal families of Europe where also known for their inbreeding way back when. The crossing of the same few sets of genes over and over leaves nothing new and greatly increases the risk of these things, There needs to be variety in the DNA.

Also incest has only been practiced in minorities. It has never been a standard. You are right in thinking that the number of people back then was greatly less and we all come from those starting people but it wasnt cause of incest the population grew. Sure there was more family mixing but there was enough crossing of different families as well as having LOTS of children as was the norm. People also migrated and mixed and so on. So yes you could end up sleeping or marrying a relative somewhere along the family tree (Many peoples families in the US have ties to say Thomas Jefferson somewhere in the line) but once you get past say...4th cousins its not such a big deal but still!

Incest is not widely praticised in secret like you seem to think it is and the stigma is there rightly so. You and J5676 need serious help.
Posted by imamilkshake on November 4, 2009 at 9:02 AM · Report this
135
"You and J5676 need serious help."

I take exception to that. I never said that I supported incest. I don't think of it as beneficial or desirable.

I have noticed that people's opposition to it is largely emotionally based. "Sick and wrong," as you describe it, isn't something that can be empirically verified. They are moral terms detached from rationality. I tend to think rationally so I have difficulty making the same emotional judgments This does not mean that I lack emotion, or am insensitive- I merely keep them in check.

I would call incest "dangerous and inadvisable" for the reasons you list, and morally wrong under most circumstances, but not all, instances.

If you've ever read Steven Pinker's essay "The Moral Instinct" you'll note that one of his hypothetical examples concerns incest. The example ends with subjects asked about this example exclaiming that they "just feel that it's wrong."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/magazi…

From the article,

"But consider these situations, originally devised by the psychologist Jonathan Haidt:

Julie is traveling in France on summer vacation from college with her brother Mark. One night they decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. Julie was already taking birth-control pills, but Mark uses a condom, too, just to be safe. They both enjoy the sex but decide not to do it again. They keep the night as a special secret, which makes them feel closer to each other. What do you think about that — was it O.K. for them to make love?

... Most people immediately declare that these acts are wrong and then grope to justify why they are wrong. It’s not so easy. In the case of Julie and Mark, people raise the possibility of children with birth defects, but they are reminded that the couple were diligent about contraception. They suggest that the siblings will be emotionally hurt, but the story makes it clear that they weren’t. They submit that the act would offend the community, but then recall that it was kept a secret. Eventually many people admit, “I don’t know, I can’t explain it, I just know it’s wrong.” People don’t generally engage in moral reasoning, Haidt argues, but moral rationalization: they begin with the conclusion, coughed up by an unconscious emotion, and then work backward to a plausible justification."

Incest is dangerous and inadvisable in my mind because the risks of procreation, emotional hurt, and community ostracisism and reprisal are real.

The last part- community ostracism- strikes a particular chord with me because an improperly justified social obligation or obligations is totalitarianism, and I am a vehement and unapologetic anti-totalitarian, which is as far as my support for J5676 goes.

Read the entire essay as the topic is just an example of a larger thesis. I think Pinker only points out that incest cannot be condemned under the controlled context of the example. I only go so far as Steven Pinker's rational approach to it.

I'm also not suggesting it is widely practised- just that it is likely still practised to some degree- I apologise if I gave the impression that it was practised often. And you're probably right that now that the world's population is greater that there is less need or pressure for it. The less it is, I agree, generally the more genetically and psychologically healthy humans will be.

The letter from the column and the example from the essay are startlingly different. Of course, I would condemn the former as morally wrong, because, yes, it is brainwashing and child abuse. That stance can be rationally defended.

I think you, and many, need to develop your objective argumentation. It's easier to condemn incest rationally, for the most part, than you think. However, a rational conversation about incest is something that I think it is impossible to have with most people, without accusations of support being bandied without justification, as you have demonstrated.

I don't support incest. Please forgive me if I take a second opinion from someone I know and trust before I seek serious help...

I'm also sorry to have written such a long-winded rebuttal, but I felt that a firm and thorough clearing of the air was in order before I suffocate in a stench of undue villlification.
More...
Posted by tantratantrum on November 4, 2009 at 8:18 PM · Report this
136 Comment Pulled (No) Comment Policy
137
I check this daily for a new column.
Posted by aroselavoie on November 18, 2009 at 11:40 PM · Report this
138
The first letter sounds like she is being set up by a police operative. I just read the article in Vanity Fair describing something similar - I don't think things like this happen in real life, just in people's imaginations, which is why these setups happen.
Posted by hibiscus on November 19, 2009 at 6:52 PM · Report this
139
HIO, wake up and smell the coffee. For whatever reason - that's how he is, he's sick of the fighting, he considers flirting just flirting - he is not willing, at this point, to stop doing it. You've put up with it for 2 years. Either stop letting it bother you, or move on, or accept it until he someday stops, which he may. Or he may not. Can't or won't wait? move on. A pretty face that makes YOUR face hurt from crying twice a month isn't worth it. There are pretty fish out there that are considerate, too, so toss that fishy back and cast bait! :)
Posted by Snappher on November 22, 2009 at 3:29 PM · Report this
140
hoi, you are being emotionally abused by an assshole. you are however, allowing it to happen. i may be wrong about this, but did your father pull similar emotional crap? get away from the asshole and get some counseling so that the next time you meet some "divine" asshole you learn to recognize the asshole and forget the divine. there are many divine,and not so divine, non-asshole people out there. you get this one pass to whine because of your age. that pass is now revoked, as is your license to bitch about someone's asshole behavior after the 10th time they have proven to you that they don't give a crap about you. this was your learning experience about choosing based solely on looks. move on and take better care of yourself.
Posted by savage love rocks on February 8, 2010 at 7:35 PM · Report this

Add a comment