Savage Love Podcast
Check out the all new Savage Lovecast site!
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
-
May 15
Shorties -
May 8
Reading Comprehension Fail -
May 1
Move On -
Apr 24
No Problem -
Apr 17
Dick Holes
More from Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Seconded
-
SL Letter of the Day: Not A Prude... And Not Just Not That...
-
Great Moments In GOP Outreach to Women
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me...
-
Tornado Truthers
Books by Dan Savage
American Savage
It Gets Better: Coming Out, Overcoming Bullying, and Creating a Life Worth Living
The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family
Things I've Learned from Women Who've Dumped Me
Skipping Towards Gomorrah
The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant
Savage Links
- Babeland
- Fleshbot
- Good Vibrations
- Joe Newton/Savage Illustrations
- Planned Parenthood
- Spreading Santorum
- Planned Parenthood's Teen Wire
- Kinsey Confidential
- Carnal Nation
- Tiny Nibbles
Want a Second Opinion?
Contact Dan Savage
Savage on YouTube
Moral Bankrupt
October 29, 2009
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. ![]()
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!
9
I agree with the advice. Accept him or leave.
Dan might not be a neurologist, but I don't think he's anti-elderly either.
"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!"
18
23
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.
32
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.
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.
34
36
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.
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.
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.
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.
#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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Letter #1 is a fake.
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.
I think a lot of the replies from people blaming one or the other are just replaying their own past issues.
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.
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.
@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?
"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.
@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.
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
And sorry for the double post. The second one was meant to be the right one.
68
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
Child rape, date rape---any kind of rape---is not a joke!
Right as rain as usual, Dan. Kudos again for an awesome column!
Right on as always, Dan! Kudos.
@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.
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.
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.
I'm concerned that J5676 is actually the wealthy, educated man in the first letter. Which I hope is fake.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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?
94
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.
Again, I still think/hope the letter is total bullshit.
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."
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."
99
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.
100
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.
101
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.
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.
i'll say, pedo-priest or -minister, as my first guess!
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.
110
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
112
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.
Either way, they both have a lot of growing up to do.
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.
No wonder Mary Cheney thinks this is a cool place to live! Lunatix!
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.
118
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.
# 2- hio- get your whip out of the closet and beat him to orgasmic pleasure, or dtmfa- shit or get off the pot.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
133
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.
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.




RSS
Comments (140) RSS