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...

Safety Valve

February 17, 2011

  • comments
  • Print

I am a straight man. From high school through college and after, I loved me some women. Then I met my present girl 10 years ago. I fell head over heels for her. I still love her. But, little by little, she has become boring to me. Our sex life has cooled. Days run together with mundane activities like watching TV, going to the store, and hanging out with our kids.

We own a house, we're financially stable, we look very traditional. But I am far from conservative. I love nightlife, crazy friends, and good drink. She was aware of this when we met because we ran in the same circles. My boredom is compounded by a craving for sex with other women. It doesn't matter who—the girl at the coffee shop, the checker at Whole Foods, every chick at the gym—I'm up to my eyeballs in covet.

I want out. I want to be a father to my kids and take care of my wife financially. But I want out. I am a few years from 40. What is the best course of action?

Too Young To Flail

One day, I'm gonna throw my hands in the air and declare that, from that blessed day forward, I shall no longer tinker with the machinery of monogamy. That day hasn't arrived, as I still have mortgage payments to make and opposite marriages to save—so here's a little tinkle for you:

You say you want out, TYTF, but are you sure about that? In her book I Don't: A Contrarian History of Marriage, Susan Squire asks: "Why does society consider it more moral for you to break up a marriage, go through a divorce, disrupt your children's lives maybe forever, just to be able to fuck someone with whom the fucking is going to get just as boring as it was with the first person before long?" (Emphasis added.)

Writing about Representative Christopher "Craigslist Congressman" Lee last week on Balloon Juice—a blog I read daily—BJ contributor "Mastermix" said: "If we want to do something about the high divorce rate, we might want to get real [about] the role of a discreet, mutually-agreed-upon affair as a safety valve."

In other words, TYTF, destroy the only home your kids have known and put yourself and the wife through the hell of divorce, and here's what happens next: You dog around for a few years and before long you shack up with a new woman—a woman who might want or already has a kid or two of her own—and a few years after that, you're trapped in another monogamous relationship that bores you, and a few years after that, you're writing to ask if you should put your second wife and your new kids through the pain of a divorce, all so you can make an embarrassing pass at a barista who has zero interest in fucking you.

Instead of putting your current family—and your hypothetical second family and that poor barista—through that, TYTF, why not risk leveling with the wife you've got now? Your marriage is already on the ropes, TYTF, so you don't have a lot to lose. Ask to have a "safety valve" installed on your marriage in the form of permission to have a discreet, mutually-agreed-upon affair, should the right opportunity/barista present itself/herself. It may not be a pleasant thing for your wife to hear, but "I'm leaving you to go fuck a barista to be named later" won't be music to her ears, either.

She may surprise you, TYTF. It's entirely possible—I hope you're sitting down for this—that you bore her just as much as she bores you. If she's itching for a few adventures of her own, social and sexual, then spend whatever money you were planning to spend on lawyers and counseling for your kids on flying grandparents in to look after the kids while you two head out for a weekend away.

But if all she wants is to stay at home in front of the TV with the kids, tell her that to preserve your sanity and, paradoxically, your marriage, you're going to go out and have some adventures on your own.

If she leaves you over it, TYTF, then you got what you wanted: out.


I'm a 31-year-old lesbian. My girlfriend is in her 30s, but save for a few one-night stands, she has never been with a woman before. I've never had better sex than the sex I'm having with her. When I try to talk to her about this, she gets anxious and makes self-deprecatory comments. I want to be with her for the long haul—our dreams fit together—I just need to figure out how to communicate with her about how great our sex is. Got any advice?

Communication Breakdown

Yeah, CB, I've got some advice for you: Shut the fuck up.

I had this awesome new boyfriend once, and the sex was so freaking great that I felt compelled to communicate with him about how great it was. "This is so great," I would tell him. "Let's try to figure out where all this greatness is coming from!" But he didn't enjoy talking about sex—particularly while we were having sex—and he got so annoyed with my attempts to figure out where all this greatness was coming from that he eventually asked/advised/ordered me to shut the fuck up.

Keep fucking the girlfriend's fucking brains right fucking out, CB, but shut the fuck up. Odds are that she'll learn to relax and open up about sex, like my boyfriend did. But in the meantime, CB, try to resist the urge to lesbian this thing into the ground by communicating it to death.


For several months now, I've had a growing attraction to one of my good male friends. I am an open bisexual male, and my friend is "straight." We've had relations—me blowing him, him jerking me—but he's adamant that he is not attracted to males at all. He nevertheless sleeps with me in my bed when he spends the night.

The plot thickens: A couple days ago, my "straight" crush ordered an eight-inch dildo, molded from a real dick, complete with balls! He got it to use on himself! He says because there's not going to be another male present when he uses it, and thus no romance, the act will be "straight." I define being sexual as enjoying not only the sexual interactions possible between preferred genders, but also the emotional satisfaction, or romance. Does he have a point?

Absolutely Hate Acronyms

Wasn't there "another male present" when you were giving him blowjobs, AHA, and he was jerking you?

Maybe if your "straight" friend wasn't accepting blowjobs from another man and swore on a stack of vintage Playboys that he would be fantasizing about a lady-parts-having woman-person pegging him when he jams that dildo up his ass, then maybe—maybe—he could be believed when he claims to be a straight dude into anal penetration. But a guy who fails to mention a burning desire for pussy to shore up his straight cred—particularly in conversation with a dude who blows him—and instead falls back on a lame "no homo" rationalization ("Hey, it's not like the dildo brought me flowers or anything gay like that!") is a lot of things, but straight ain't one of 'em.

If your straight friend manages to fuck some sense into himself on that dildo, AHA, you might want to take a turn on it yourself.


Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.

mail@savagelove.net

Share via

 

Comments (317) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
ilikeu 1
Santorum making headlines again - http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/02/ric…

Good work Dan!
Posted by ilikeu on February 16, 2011 at 8:55 AM · Report this
2 Comment Pulled (OffTopic) Comment Policy
CharlesF 3
Good advice to CB. In my experience, overeager, unnecessary communication, especially when one partner doesn't wish to discuss or dissect the act of sex, can be harmful to the relationship.
Posted by CharlesF on February 16, 2011 at 8:59 AM · Report this
wondergus 4
"try to resist the urge to lesbian this thing into the ground by communicating it to death."

Truer words were never spoken. Well done.
Posted by wondergus on February 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM · Report this
5
"Lesbian this thing into the ground" - Hilarious!
Posted by hotstuff on February 16, 2011 at 9:06 AM · Report this
6
AHA, you know, he might consider it "straighter" if there WAS a woman present while you were blowing him. I volunteer to chaperone!

Just ignore the sketchbook. >>
Posted by blah on February 16, 2011 at 9:22 AM · Report this
7
I am actually having a hard time imagining what a meaningful dialog about how awesome one's sex is would sound like. I mean, I appreciate a "wow! damn! that was amazing! I may not walk for weeks!" as much as the next gal, and would probably start wondering what was wrong with me if I didn't get that kind of reaction every so often, but I picturing some sort of "Honey, we need to talk" scene where you sit down, have a cup of herbal tea, look meaningfully into the other person's eyes, and say, "I just think we need to talk about the fact that you totally rock in bed. How do you feel about that?". What's the desired result? "I really appreciate you letting me know how you feel, Susan. When you say that, it gives me a feeling of validation. How does that make you feel?" And all of this when you could just be having the awesome sex that you want to break into small discussion groups to workshop.
Posted by AnathemaT on February 16, 2011 at 9:24 AM · Report this
8
TYTF - this isn't some special circumstance, it's a classic mid-life crisis. I'm 39 and half the men and women I know are going through some variation on this. Dan is exactly right - think about whether there's a way to put excitement back in your life without breaking up your family.
Posted by citrine on February 16, 2011 at 9:26 AM · Report this
Looking For a Better Read 9
RE: AHA - who cares how the "straight" friend wants to label/characterize himself? It's his closet, let him decorate it however he damn well sees fit.
Posted by Looking For a Better Read on February 16, 2011 at 9:26 AM · Report this
10
As a lesbian, I also found "lesbian this thing into the ground" hilarious. Let's just say I'm glad Lindy West isn't a lesbian or I'm sure she'd find it offensive.
Posted by Good to know Dan can still make fun of some groups on February 16, 2011 at 9:27 AM · Report this
11
Wow! The first comment!!! I am baked as I write this so this is first impressions and very offensive- let the flames begin!

As a gay man I don't think Dan understands that MOST women are not interested in threesomes, polyamory or letting their husband fuck around. Maybe the highly charged sexually libertine women who write for his advice (where can I find them again?) are down with the safety valve fuck around advice but that is definitely not MOST women. So good luck with that conversation but you may want to save up for a lawyer first.

You all thought that marriage was this patriarchal institution to oppress women: WRONG!! Actually marriage was invented to oppress men and channel that insatiable sexual drive into caring for his family, children and the one piece of ass he is allowed to have. It worked fairly well (for men at least) for the first 10,000 years or so until the Women's movement said: "Not only are we limiting it to one woman per man, NOW we are saying that the one spittoon a man is allowed to have also gets to determine how much (or how little) sex the man gets. My body, my choice, after all. Ya, ya, lots of women (at least a lot who read Dan's column) are in the same boat with a spouse who won't put out but I bet the ratio is 30 to 1 in the "real" world so spare me the highly sexed comments from under appreciated women. On second thought hit me with them! It will give me something to do on the 28-29 nights a month when my wife gets to exercise her "choice" to tittilate, torture and sexually deprive her husband.

An alternative for the guy might be to just fuck around and lie like a woman about it (Oh now I have done it!). If both sides have just a bit of plausible deniability to hang on then the arrangement proposed has worked for thousands of years. You pretend to be faithful, she pretends to believe you and the whole family goes on- that is why they call it wedded BLISS.

However as a gay man, Dan obviously understands lesbians: "Resist the urge to lesbian this thing into the ground by communicating it to death" is really great advice. I was not familiar with Lesbian drama before his column but I am hardly surprised. How could it be otherwise with two emotionally erratic, periodically irrational beings in a relationship- even if they ARE cycling together...

The advice to AHA is spot on. As a gay man, Dan obviously has a finely tuned gaydar. But this does seem to conflict with previous statements about how "normal" men can accept blowjobs from other men without getting the gay on them. I always thought that was wrong. Sure a straight guy might do a circle jerk as a teenager and even lend an assist but to lay back and accept a blowjob from another guy and then claim straighthood is way, way over the top. I don't think the dude is floating there thinking about pussy and full, soft, woman lips on his dick. Dan nailed it- again. The dudes bud is sending more than mixed messages and he should go for it.
More...
Posted by Professor on February 16, 2011 at 9:29 AM · Report this
12
TYTF, your wife knows you're on the make. Don't think she's so blind/stupid not to notice you're throwing yourself at baristas half your age. She's already planning her escape from YOU.
Posted by whatevercathy on February 16, 2011 at 9:41 AM · Report this
13
Um, is it just me or does that first letter give the impression that this guy's wife has no fucking clue that he finds sex with her boring? TALK TO HER ABOUT IT FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Read some books, watch some videos, try some new stuff. If that doesn't work, THEN talk to her about stepping outside your marriage.

Also, how much of the burden of caring for the house and kids is she shouldering? Does she take on most of it while holding down a job? That can really kill bedroom creativity, ya know.

@8, dude, you're right, it sounds JUST like a mid-life crisis.
Posted by JrzWrld on February 16, 2011 at 9:43 AM · Report this
14
Love the use of lesbian as a verb. But let's not jump to conclusions: "When I try to talk to her about this" could also mean "when I say 'That was the best sex I've ever had'"... I'm sure not every lesbian lesbians everything lesbian.

And Citrine @ 8 is right: TYTF's letter has "mid-life crisis" written all over it.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM · Report this
15
Could TYTF be any more boringly normal? It's hilarious that his idea of a wild time is "nightlife, crazy friends, and good drink."
Posted by ynh on February 16, 2011 at 9:47 AM · Report this
samanthaf63 16
NOT impressed by Mr. Flailing, who wants to talk about what HE wants - but not with his wife.

He doesn't record any effort he's made to spice things up (he just complains about wanting to nail other women and says the sex life with his wife has cooled) and his first reaction is to run away? Maybe he could try TALKING to her before doing anything.
Posted by samanthaf63 on February 16, 2011 at 9:49 AM · Report this
17
I'm with 13 & 16 - show her the letter you wrote, Flailing, and see if she (a) wants to spice up her boring suburban life too, or (b) wants to protect her boring suburban life from the financial hardship of supporting two households on the same money, or (c) wants to release you from marriage so you can both hope for happiness with other people.

I don't understand 11 & 12, who assume that she already knows what's in his head. As the wife when this same midlife crisis hit my family - no, I didn't know. And yes, I wanted to know. We chose (a), and, thanks, it's working out okay so far.
Posted by EricaP on February 16, 2011 at 9:54 AM · Report this
18
Although @11 does have a point that Flailing might want to consult with a lawyer before showing his wife the letter he wrote. Never hurts to understand your financial/legal situation.
Posted by EricaP on February 16, 2011 at 9:57 AM · Report this
shahnahnah 19
Loved the response to TYTF, especially this: "...all so you can make an embarrassing pass at a barista who has zero interest in fucking you." I always laugh whenever a guy acts like the only thing keeping him from sleeping with the barista and every single woman at his gym is his wife. Uh-huh. It's easy to get delusional about how much tail a single man can get when you've been married for years, I'm sure. And sure, maybe it's a quality thing over a quantity thing. If two novelty lays a year is better than 3 a week of the routine variety, I suppose go forth. But just remember that married men have more sex than single men, so if you want to bone, you should probably stick it out.
Posted by shahnahnah on February 16, 2011 at 10:02 AM · Report this
20
#11 yep, you come across just as much an idiot as you claimed you would. Marriage is a patriarchal institute to oppress/enable everyone. Its origins are in economic stability. Not love. Or sex.

Furthermore, when my ex boyfriend asked to be in an open relationship I was NOT up for it. But that's because our relationship was already rocky, and that was his (weaselly) way out. If I were in a LTR that was loving, stable, honest (can't necessarily identify TYTF's as that) then I could definitely see myself being OK with some fooling around on the side. Just cos you're wife is holding out on you doesn't make all women lying, conniving PsOS

PS I'm not sure being stoned at 9am excuses being a dick

PPS Great work Dan, per usual
Posted by lalagirl on February 16, 2011 at 10:05 AM · Report this
21
I don't understand why Dan thinks TYTF wants out of his marriage because he wants a second wife, a second marriage, a second family. Nothing in his letter even implies that. He wants out because he wants to NOT be tied down to one woman; he wants to be a poon hound.

It strikes me as completely misguided and inappropriate for Dan to warn him that his "second" situation will bore him as much as the first one did; he's not LOOKING for a second situation. He just wants to be single. That's what his letter says to me, anyway.

I think if he moves out and gains a single status, but remains an active parent, both he and the wife - and subsequently the kids - will be better off. It's certainly worth a shot.
Posted by wayne on February 16, 2011 at 10:06 AM · Report this
22
I appreciate you posting, answering tytf's letter, especially after last weeks she will not. I was glad to read a male's perspective on this. I also liked the advice on trying not to home wreck unnecesesarily and just have a fling on the side. It does sound alot like a midlife crisis, I'm a married 40 yr. old man. One must take advantage of quality somewhat youthful erections while one can!
Posted by scorpio of Id. on February 16, 2011 at 10:13 AM · Report this
23
@ 21 - Dan says "You dog around for a few years and before long you shack up with a new woman"... and I'm sure that's what happens most of the time, since middle-age guys soon come to realize that the baristas they end up making embarassing passes at generally have zero interest in fucking them. So they find one who does and shack up with her, for fear of ending up alone.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 10:15 AM · Report this
24
@ 20 - Marriage was not initially conceived as a patriarchal institution, it was indeed meant to force men into taking their responsibilities for their children - before DNA tests could confirm paternity, marriage/official monogamy were the only way to force a men to recognize the children of the woman he was having sex with as his.

That's not to say that laws and religions, made by men, didn't turn it into a patriarchal institution, which they obviously did.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 10:22 AM · Report this
25
Danny you wanna see the real problem with romance, peep this video made entirely by women: http://vimeo.com/19843219
Posted by michellegreee on February 16, 2011 at 10:29 AM · Report this
26
Kudos to Dan for pointing out that Mrs. TYTF may find their current life just as stultifying as Mr. TYTF does. There's a good chance she hasn't yet articulated this even to herself, and that it's lurking under the surface as an unnamed dissatisfaction. There's also a good chance she's way beyond bored and already having an affair or plotting her own exit.

Nobody gets married in joyful anticipation of the tedium that often comes with long-term commitment. It takes effort and communication to keep things fresh. Mr. TYTF also may have considered that securing his own "freedom" will result in much less freedom for his wife - and likely not nearly as much freedom for himself as his fantasies may lead him to believe. After divorce, they each will still have to deal with the mundane details of life, plus the logistics of joint custody. The added expense of a second home will leave him with less disposable income for living the wild life, or picking up new women.

Mr. TYTF could do himself and his wife a great favor by having a frank discussion - though I'd suggest he not open with "I can take or leave this boring marriage, provided I get to fuck other women." For example, he could tell her that he sometimes (often, constantly) misses the person he was and the life he had 10 years ago, and ask if she ever feels the same way. Even if she doesn't, it's only fair for him to let her know that he's dissatisfied, and give her an opportunity to help turn things around if she's willing/able, rather than make unilateral decisions in their partnership.
Posted by MsChris on February 16, 2011 at 10:32 AM · Report this
27
off topic. I'm in love with EricaP.
Posted by semi-crepuscular on February 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM · Report this
28
@11 I think a little research on the history of marriage is in order for you. Marriage today is not the marriage of 10,000 years ago and monogamy was not the norm at least for men. Just like the animal kingdom the more offspring you sire the more assured your bloodline will go on. The history of marriage is not one of commitment to one wife because of love and family but rather to money, power, and status. Women were treated as chattle to be bartered. Marriage is and was a contractual arrangement that historically favored either the male, the father of the bride, or the families. The women's movement just gave women a more equal footing in what had been a lopsided male dominated arrangement.

This distorted view of marriage history really irks me. Off topic but related those opposed to marriage equality consistently spout that marriage is between one man and one women and has been for thousands of years. It is simply not true.
Posted by ChazRI63 on February 16, 2011 at 10:47 AM · Report this
29 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
wondergus 30
@28 - Women have largely (not completely) controlled sex and reproduction, which is an ENORMOUS source of power. Patriarchy is part of a counterbalance to that power. The Women's Movement, as much as I support it, creates imbalance in marital relationships by giving women more power in society and within marriage, without any counterbalance to the sexual-reproductive power women already hold.
Posted by wondergus on February 16, 2011 at 10:55 AM · Report this
31
Okay, getting a little sick of all of the well-intentioned and well-reasoned critiques of monogamy on this site.

Monogamy is HARD. We know. Everyone in possession of a working set of genitals knows. We want to stick them into/be stuck by everything we see. We get it.

But a 'safety valve affair,' if such a thing exists, surely involves discretion on a sarchophagal order. 'Asking permission first' - AKA laying an ultimatum - is in fact asking the other spouse to play the part of the sex-negative harpy that broke up the marriage, in your grand narrative of emotional disconnection.

If you want the thrill of cheating, you have to accept the guilt of being a cheater. Take ownership of your sins. Don't ask your poor wife or husband to shoulder that burden for you, and for God's sake don't do it predicated on the mealy-mouthed idea that 'they probably want it as bad as I do.'

If you want to have sex with someone other than you're married to, and you want to do it with the knowledge and consent of your spouse, there are ways to negotiate that. But that is NOT AN AFFAIR. Calling it such demeans the relationships of thousands of couples in open marriages, poly marriages, or marriages with threesomes on the table.
Posted by Torchy Blane on February 16, 2011 at 10:55 AM · Report this
32
@28, @11 is a troll. You're not gonna get anything satisfying from trying to engage him. He's not interested in understanding anything.
Posted by anyes on February 16, 2011 at 11:00 AM · Report this
33
Sounds like Flailing needs to try to lesbian his marriage back into shape before he throws it overboard.
Posted by Chase on February 16, 2011 at 11:02 AM · Report this
34
11: with that misogynistic historically-challenged screed you spewed above, you should be grateful to ever get any. Ever. Under any circumstances.
Posted by maddy811 on February 16, 2011 at 11:03 AM · Report this
35
The "straight" dude in AHA's letter is fooling himself. If you like men to suck your dick, you are gay. If you enjoy getting jacked off by other men, you are gay. If you stuff dildos up your butt, you are gay. Just because he's doing it with no one around, doesn't make it any less gay. This so-called straight man is just trying to have his cock and eat it too.
Posted by FuryOfFirestorm on February 16, 2011 at 11:06 AM · Report this
36
And the best way to open up your relationship is to let your partner go first.

@29: so how would you propose to counterbalance this "sexual-reproductive power" that women have? Perhaps a tax of 30-something percent on all of their wages? Or maybe a correspondingly higher share of the gestation and child-rearing burden?
Posted by Chase on February 16, 2011 at 11:13 AM · Report this
37
#11--maybe not so good to post baked
Posted by tenrabbit on February 16, 2011 at 11:19 AM · Report this
38
Confidential to AHA:

Believe it or not, it's quite possible that that friend of yours really is straight, or at least 98% straight.

I recently met a middle-aged married father of three at a work-related seminar. We had lunch that day and then stayed in touch via email, mostly as a way of keeping our businesses linked. At one point he asked me if I were gay. I told him yes, and he dropped the conversation.

A few weeks after that, he asked me to meet him for lunch. While at lunch, he popped a wild question on me. Basically, he wanted to experience anal sex with a guy.

We negotiated some terms, and met at a local hotel. He did his thing, and we both enjoyed it. He clearly isn't interested in doing it again. He just wanted to know what it felt like.

I think A LOT of straight men have done this at one time or another, but that doesn't make them bi... it just makes them open and honest and adventurous. Maybe that's how you should see your friend: as an adventurer.

Posted by cxg on February 16, 2011 at 11:20 AM · Report this
39
@13, I agree. It would seem that there haven't been any attempts to communicate with the wife and spice things up. I don't disagree that a safety valve may end up being the answer, but I think an emphasis on their sex life should come first. Then, an open relationship could be a supplement to their improved sex life or used to postpone divorce.
Posted by Jamie in Pittsburgh http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/strawberry.limonade?ref=name on February 16, 2011 at 11:23 AM · Report this
40
@11. All the sexually liberated libertine women *I* know are just DYING to have no-strings-attached sex with misogynist douchebags, so I am really confused about why you're not getting any, Professor!
Posted by jeccat on February 16, 2011 at 11:25 AM · Report this
41
@ 38 - But how would you call that straight acquaintance of yours if you learned that he'd told the same story to and had his "once-in-a-lifetime encounter" with 100 other guys?

We just all need to remember that people lie - it's part of human nature - and that some people lie whenever its convenient for them. Some only lie to others, some also lie to themselves because they can't accept their true nature.

That said, it IS possible that AHA's friend is straight. Just not "quite" possible.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 11:28 AM · Report this
42
@27 - swoon...
Posted by EricaP on February 16, 2011 at 11:28 AM · Report this
43
@31 "'Asking permission first' - AKA laying an ultimatum - is in fact asking the other spouse to play the part of the sex-negative harpy that broke up the marriage"

I disagree. You can say - "I love you, and I love sex with you, and I want to keep having sex with you... but I can't help also feeling that I want something else, too, because life is short and then you're dead a long time. Do you ever feel that way, and do you want to talk about how we can approach this together?"
Posted by EricaP on February 16, 2011 at 11:31 AM · Report this
Rach3l 44
Guess what? People are boring. Every single person in the world is boring. The older a person gets, the more boring they become (and more often). You are boring by yourself, you're boring when you're with other people. Especially if you have kids, you are SO FREAKING BORING. This is not a travesty, it's the human goddamn condition.

I don't understand why people get married unless they are prepared to be bored. fucksticks! If you want some excitement in your life, try losing the financial security and lying awake at night wondering how you're going to feed your family next month. But if you've got the security taken care of, prepare to be bored/boring.
Posted by Rach3l on February 16, 2011 at 11:32 AM · Report this
45
@21,

He's not necessarily LOOKING for a second situation, but that doesn't mean he won't END UP in one.

Read @19's note if you haven't already. If he does leave, he'll most likely end up wandering aimlessly for the first six months or so. Occasionally, he'll get lucky. More often, he won't. Eventually, he'll find a woman that he likes who likes him too. Most likely, she'll want to be in a relationship if they're going to be fucking regularly. To avoid losing the opportunity to fuck this new woman, he'll agree to a relationship and eventually end up right back where he started. He'll tell himself that this time it will be different because the new girlfriend is so much different than his ex-wife.

Bottom line is, his wife has NOT become boring; HE has become bored with HER. And there's nothing wrong with that. It's natural and understandable. But he's misreading the signal if he thinks that the grass is so much greener on the other side. If he and his wife still love and respect each other, then he's better off trying to talk with her and see if they can spice up their lives together.
Posted by ML77 on February 16, 2011 at 11:35 AM · Report this
46
If a man enjoys having sexual pleasure with another man he is gay or at least bi.

I have to laugh at people who can deny that when their dick has been in another man's mouth.

I think Grouch Marx said it best with


"Who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes?"


Get real.

Posted by SavageFan50 on February 16, 2011 at 11:41 AM · Report this
warreno 47
My own reply to TYTF:

Grow the fuck up.

You knew what a marriage vow was when you made the commitment. You knew, when you inseminated your wife, that children are a lifetime responsibility. And, now that you have something a lot of people never will - a stable relationship, a family of your own, and a good friend with whom you can spend quality time on the sofa - now, you want out.

Guess what. You made a promise to her. You made a promise to your kids. Now you get to keep it.

Stop being such a selfish, whiny fuckknuckle and act like you give a shit about the people closest to you.

By the way, a guy in his 40s trying to bird-dog women is not trendy, cool, or a sex icon. He's just a creep. When he's abandoned a wife and kids to do it, he's a creep and an asshole.
Posted by warreno http://www.nightwares.com on February 16, 2011 at 11:46 AM · Report this
48
I was a serial cheater for years until I realized that one more affair wouldn't do anything to satisfy my lust for other women. It would always be there no matter how many girls I screwed. Ultimately, screwing other people ended up being a pretty empty experience. Then I married a bisexual woman. Hell, just knowing I could go off with someone else is enough of a pressure relief for me.

I wish TYTF could have stood his ground on what he wanted from his relationship. I think Matisse has a pretty good article this week on this subject as well.
Posted by Hybrid Vigor on February 16, 2011 at 12:09 PM · Report this
Eva Hopkins 49
Not much to say, for once, other than GREAT advice Dan. I wish more folks thought through what marriage to someone else will be like - ie - Can I stand the small annoyances about this person? Their laugh/sanitary habits/ideas about money? Do I not mind being bored around/with them (not that as a constant state it's okay, but that's part of the long haul)? Can I talk to them about the things that really matter to me &/or turn me on? ARE THEY MY FRIEND, as well as someone I am in love with? It's not IF you will be bored with someone someday, but when, & do the things that you have in common hold you together & keep you mostly content when that occurs.

Spoken like a longtime married person, Dan. ;)

I think he should try talking to her. She deserves honesty as I bet the #1 LW is gonna cheat if he doesn't get to scratch his itch.
Posted by Eva Hopkins http://www.lunamusestudios.com on February 16, 2011 at 12:10 PM · Report this
50
@41.
Yeah, I see your point and would tend to agree in most cases (I've had my share of married "straight" men over the years, so I know the signs).
In his case, however, I tend to believe him. He's 50, lives in the same town, and seemed extremely nervous and "green" when the act took place. There was no kissing or cuddling, and we talked a little afterward about how it had compared to sex with his wife. We've met for business lunches since and he seems to have absolutely no interest in repeating. Again, I just think he was curious.
Posted by cxg on February 16, 2011 at 12:13 PM · Report this
51
@44: Too many competing definitions of "boring".
There's a difference between a life without bigtime peaks and valleys, and a life that doesn't have anything in it that excites you or brings you joy. We don't need to lead flashy lives but if you're waking up every morning and wishing you could just stay asleep, something's wrong. We all deserve better than that.

(And yeah, novelty is one way to stave that off. Maybe novelty is no substitute for true contentment and inner peace, but it's still pretty awesome in its own right.)

Also: "Every single person in the world is boring." No, that's simply not true, and the only people I know who feel that way are dysthymic misanthropes who see the world as boring because they don't feel jackshit, except maybe occasional flashes of resentment and hatred. I hope neither you or the OP are in that boat (yet).
Posted by ribbit ribbit on February 16, 2011 at 12:30 PM · Report this
52
TYTF, you say you still love your wife but your sex life has cooled, your days run together with mundane activities, and she become boring to you. Guess what? You are probably just as boring to her, if not more so! What do you do? Get your butt off the couch, turn off the TV, find activities that aren't mundane. Hire a babysitter and go out for some of that crazy nightlife and good drink you once enjoyed. Just because you're married doesn't mean you can't go out and have fun. Order up some kinky sex toys to bring the spark back into the bedroom. Treat her like the princess she is and remind yourself why you fell in love with her--and still love her. Your little mid-life crisis is not divorce-worthy. Your marriage is not on the rocks. Do what you need to do to fix things. If you can't figure it out on your own with your wife, counseling might be an option that you should consider.
Posted by Devoted http://devotedlvr.com on February 16, 2011 at 12:42 PM · Report this
53
I get when a married guy whose wife has refused sex for years wants an outlet. But TYTF just sounds like a total douche to me.

1)"I loved me some women" - really dude?

2) "my present girl" - Wow, I wish my boyfriend called me that. *Swoon*

3)"mundane activities like watching TV, going to the store, and hanging out with our kids" - Yeah, shopping for food and spending time with your kids is just torturous. If you aren't doing body shots off a model while skydiving then life just isn't worth living anymore.

4) "nightlife, crazy friends, and good drink" - Sounds like the yearbook blurb of some too cool high school kid.

I hope his wife is secretly cheating on him already.
Posted by CanadianChick on February 16, 2011 at 1:37 PM · Report this
54
*rolls eyes* Guess what, TYTF? You have kids. There is no "out", even if you get that divorce. Like many dads, you will probably get the kids every other (or even every!) weekend. So much for banging hot baristas on those nights. On the weekends you are free, you will be too broke from paying support to be able to afford the lifestyle you desire. Raising kids is exhausting, period. Shouldn't have had them if you can't hack it, but it's too late now, buddy. Take some ownership of the situation and talk to your freaking wife. Please also remember the old adage "a housekeeper is cheaper than a divorce". Maybe you can both go out and get some fun for less than the cost of splitting up.
Posted by teamcanada on February 16, 2011 at 1:59 PM · Report this
55
To CB! You're telling your girl that you've never had better sex than with her......which means that in that moment, you're comparing her to every other woman you've ever had sex with. Which is how many in your girlfriend's mind?? Even though you're telling her the sex is great, which you think she should hear as the main message, you're bringing up an obvious imbalance in sexual experience, which could surely be a place of insecurity for her. Plus, you said she's a few years older than you, another little piece of the insecurity ("i'm older and less experienced"). And even though she's obviously uncomfortable with you talking this way, sounds like you keep putting it in her face : COMPARISON. to your other lovers. "Honey, reallly! YOU get the Blue Ribbon for being the BEST!!" (Because i've had SO much sex with SO many other partners, i KNOW!)

Stop pushing your sexual experience on her!! Shut up and let her have some more of her own, with you!
Posted by natashaspeaks on February 16, 2011 at 2:02 PM · Report this
56
@ 52 -- Agreed. Getting some on the side won't alleviate the boredom TYFT feels when he's at home with his wife and kids. Knowing he has some extracurricular action waiting for him might make his domestic existence more bearable, but he owes his family a lot better than that. He should work on rejuvenating the marriage he entered into before seriously considering changing its terms.
Posted by Amanda on February 16, 2011 at 2:06 PM · Report this
57
#35: If you stuff dildos up your butt, you are gay.

Um, no. The prostate feels good when it's stimulated - and the nerve endings will feel it just the same whether the deed is done by a man, a woman, or a toy.

Having said that...the fact that this guy got a realistic dildo does make my gaydar go off a little bit. It's not like there aren't a zillion penetrative toys out there that are just colourful and abstract. This dude chose a dick-n-balls. One has to wonder why... :D

To the guy who wrote the first letter: it's entirely possible that you're bored because you're BORING. Your letter complains that you and your wife hang out on the couch all the time but doesn't mention that you've ever tried to initiate anything more fun (kinda seems like you're putting the blame for all this boring-ness onto her but have you been doing anything to shake up your routine?). It's entirely possible that if you made an effort to do cooler things with your wife, you'd both enjoy it...and spending time with her in a new context would fire up the spark again.

It's a bit ridiculous that anyone would recommend a "safety valve" affair when you haven't even taken the basic measure of trying to fix your marriage first. I don't agree with those who've said that marriage is destined to be boring so tough shit - marriage does not have to be boring. But you have to work at avoiding ruts and keeping things interesting. You can't just passively let the current carry you along and then be shocked and outraged that it's carried you someplace not so fun. You ended up there because you didn't do anything to steer the boat elsewhere, dude. If you don't absorb that lesson then you will end up bored and dissatisfied even if you break off your marriage and end up with someone else.
More...
Posted by perversecowgirl on February 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM · Report this
58
To CB! You're telling your girl that you've never had better sex than with her......which means that in that moment, you're comparing her to every other woman you've ever had sex with. Which is how many in your girlfriend's mind?? Even though you're telling her the sex is great, which you think she should hear as the main message, you're bringing up an obvious imbalance in sexual experience, which could surely be a place of insecurity for her. Plus, you said she's a few years older than you, another little piece of the insecurity ("i'm older and less experienced"). And even though she's obviously uncomfortable with you talking this way, sounds like you keep putting it in her face : COMPARISON. to your other lovers. "Honey, reallly! YOU get the Blue Ribbon for being the BEST!!" (Because i've had SO much sex with SO many other partners, i KNOW!)

Stop pushing your sexual experience on her!! Shut up and let her have some more of her own, with you!
Posted by natashaspeaks on February 16, 2011 at 2:10 PM · Report this
59
@ 50 - Since you already know the signs (nothing like experience, is there?), then you can take my post @ 41 as rhetorical, and not specifically directed at you nor relating to this acquaintance of yours. After all, this is really about AHA's straight friend (who IS getting deeper and deeper into his "absolutely not gay" homosexual behaviour).

I'd say from my personal experience, though, that the lack of kissing and cuddling is not really telling - it could also be part of the lie a supposedly straight man tells himself so as not to be confused about his identity. (Please don't interpret this as me contradicting you on your acquaintance's straightness, I'm just stating that I've seen this behaviour rather often in closeted men).
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 2:12 PM · Report this
60
The last line of Dan's advice is one of the greatest ever.

The equivalent of "To be or not to be" for Shakespeare.

I remember at least a decade ago, there was a letter from a really bitchy and disrespectful guy who wanted advice about bleeding during anal sex, and Dan said "Go walk your bloody ass down to the bookstore and read about it." (That was before internet age. Wow I'm old.)
Posted by gayBoiNYC on February 16, 2011 at 2:16 PM · Report this
61
@ 35, 38, 41 et al

Who gives a shit what you call it? If a guy likes an occasional bj from a dude, but identifies as straight who cares? Why do we need to label everything and worry about definitions? Just let the guy identify as straight and give him some head once in a while. Sounds like everybody comes out a winner.
Posted by flounder on February 16, 2011 at 2:17 PM · Report this
62
Mmmmm... nearly middle aged divorced dude, with kids, a custody battle, legal fees, alimony and a mortgage on a house he doesn't get to live in, available every other weekend and no holidays, who left his family because he wasn't getting enough? I'd hit that.
Posted by kirstenfifi on February 16, 2011 at 2:19 PM · Report this
63
@ 58 - Very true.

Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 2:32 PM · Report this
64
Why are gay guys always worried about proving other guys are gay? Who gives a shit what that wanker calls himself? He's just another straight guy who LOVES cock, much like many Republican representatives....
Posted by koshkamat on February 16, 2011 at 2:33 PM · Report this
65
@ 61 - We do. And that's a good enough reason to discuss it.

The real question is : Why do YOU care if we do?
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 2:43 PM · Report this
66
@ 64 - Thanks for providing (part of) the answer to your own question : Because these "not gay" guys who enjoy dick often turn out to be our worst enemies in the public arena, like those cock-sucking Republicans who vote to ban gay marriage.

I don't see anything wrong with exposing hypocrisy.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 2:47 PM · Report this
67
I'm a straight male with a fetish for slim, 100% passable-for-female transsexuals. After studying them, transporn, and transsexuality since 2007, I've seen and met a few who could put my last 2 bio ex-girlfriends out to fucking pasture! The thing is that my luck with women is so bad that all the ones I wanna fuck are either out of my league, not single, or inaccessible! The good news is that once I get the one I'm attracted to, I have the power to take her on an incredible life's journey, but I'm also more focused on staging my triumphant return to college to study Psychology. I'm caught between a [female] cock and a hard place (I know. Right?)
Posted by She Has Titties And Balls on February 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM · Report this
68
@61

I'm not sure how much it MATTERS, so to speak, but it's odd that the guy keeps insisting he's straight while indulging in a lot of homosexual activity. He gets blow jobs from his friend, he jerks his friend off, buys a realistic cock-and-balls dildo... sounds like he is, at the very least, not entirely straight. He can call himself whatever he wants, but that's no reason why the rest of us can't call a spade a spade.
Posted by chicago girl on February 16, 2011 at 3:01 PM · Report this
69
#11, I choose to believe that you are just as much of a dick sober as you are stoned.
Posted by suddenlyorcas on February 16, 2011 at 3:06 PM · Report this
scary tyler moore 70
only boring people get bored!
Posted by scary tyler moore http://pushymcshove.blogspot.com/ on February 16, 2011 at 3:18 PM · Report this
pastaefagoli 71
@38: thanks for the mental image ;)
Posted by pastaefagoli on February 16, 2011 at 3:21 PM · Report this
LondonGray 72
TYTF You are having a midlife crisis. Chill out and tell your girl what is going on!
Posted by LondonGray on February 16, 2011 at 3:28 PM · Report this
73
I'm with Canadian Chick. The guy in the first letter just sounds so positively lame and self-unaware. Wow, you are 40 and not as thrilled with life as you used to be? What a shock! If only Hollywood would make a million movies about that, comedians could joke about it, maybe even come up with some catchy term for what you're experiencing!

And this, this gem: 'I am far from conservative. I love nightlife, crazy friends, and good drink. She was aware of this when we met because we ran in the same circles.'

Aware of what? That young people generally go out, enjoy drinking and have friends (some 'crazy' – lemme guess, he likes to streak? Has a fauxhawk at 45? Goes to Vegas and comes back with dirty stories? Totally wild!)? That often, when they have kids, they need to do 'boring' things like shop for groceries?

Dude, please, get a clue, read some books, you are not a unique snowflake.

And that guy who posted the video to that misogynist video (oh sorry, it can't be, your mom's a woman!)... ehh, never mind. Something tells me you are the guy from AHA's letter.
Posted by Shazaam on February 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM · Report this
GymGoth 74
TYTF advice is all wrong, but predictable from this site. MOST people who enter marriage are expecting monogamy. TYTF should have maybe asked himself whether this woman was the woman for him before he got married and started a family!

Dan should have explored how to get the "spark" back with his wife. How about a sex therapist? Why is the "safety valve" the only option?

I don't know what planet you think people are living on Dan, but every couple I know who has ever "opened up" the marriage ends up with the cheating partner finding someone better and then leaving the spouse.

TYTF should grow a real pair, realize he is starting his midlife crisis, and get some counseling. If he wants to be a horndog and fuck everything he sees (or try to), then he should accept that he is not the marrying kind.
Posted by GymGoth on February 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM · Report this
75
@74- how many couples do you know who didn't open up their marriages, and then got divorced?

how many couples do you know where one or both is having sex with outside people, but not telling you about it? I think you don't have any idea.

So people get divorced without outside-sex and people stay together with outside-sex... Tell me again why you think there's a cause and effect operating here? That if a marriage opens up, that will cause them to divorce?
Posted by EricaP on February 16, 2011 at 3:47 PM · Report this
venomlash 76
@46: Actually, that was Chico. But he was dressed as Groucho at the time.
Posted by venomlash on February 16, 2011 at 3:51 PM · Report this
77
Rereading TYTF, I'm struck by this bit:

"...we look very traditional. But I am far from conservative. I love nightlife, crazy friends, and good drink. She was aware of this when we met because we ran in the same circles."

At no point in his letter does he say that he's tried to discuss his domestic boredom with her and found her unsympathetic. Yet "She was aware of [his love of nightlife etc.] when we met" suggests that he thinks she simply *must* know how discontented he is now, without his having brought it up, just because she should remember what he used to like 10 years ago.

And "we ran in the same circles" suggests that she shared his enjoyment of those things back in the day - yet it doesn't occur to him that she might also be discontented now, for exactly the same reasons he is.

Assuming that our partners can read our minds, and that we can read theirs, isn't a great basis for making major decisions. Time for a real talk, preferably over piña coladas in the rain...
Posted by MsChris on February 16, 2011 at 3:58 PM · Report this
78
Dan's advice to TYTF is generally spot on, but he tends to forget one major detail about relating to other people who are not your significant other:

Your significant other is there for a reason. Back when you were single and dating, you were probably going through a fair number of candidates trying to find someone who didn't drive you nuts. This is why dating sucks in the first place.

As someone who's in an open relationship and who gets to nail other women (and men!) besides my wife on a somewhat regular basis, I can pretty much guarantee that while the grass seems greener on the piece on the side, there's something around an 85-95% chance that the cute barista will drive you nuts. Probably inside of a couple of hours. I generally find myself coming back to my wife at the end of the day and saying "oh thank god I'm with you!" One of the reasons which of course, is that she lets me nail other people.

@64: Straight guys who love cock are called bisexual, by the way. :P And "straight guys who love cock who don't like to admit it" are called closet cases. They're also generally undateable. I don't recommend the practice of pursuing relationships with them, and neither does Dan.
Posted by gromm on February 16, 2011 at 4:03 PM · Report this
Anne in MA 79
Dan, this lesbian just bust a nut - bust an ovary? - laughing when you used "lesbian" as a verb. Just perfect.
Posted by Anne in MA on February 16, 2011 at 4:06 PM · Report this
80
@ Erica P -- 74's main point just echoes the opinion of earlier posts that opening up a marriage at the first signs of a rut seems a bit premature. TYFT sounds downright lazy and unwilling to take responsibility for his own feelings of boredom. He obviously wrote into the right column if he wanted to hear that renegotiating the monogamy of his marriage should be a first course of action.
Posted by Amanda on February 16, 2011 at 4:20 PM · Report this
81
@ 77 - And maybe they'll realize that they both like making love at midnight in the dunes on the Cape.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 4:25 PM · Report this
82
@ 80 - Maybe Dan just realized that the question is not if the guy is going to have sex with other people or not - since he most definitely is, and he was obviously only looking for permission to do so. There doesn't seem to be much sense in trying to convince him otherwise, so what you can do is advise him to talk it out with his wife. Who knows what will come out if it? Maybe he'll realize his wife is also bored and they'll end up finding another type of safety valve.

If you push the guy in a direction he's already made his mind no to go in, then he'll probably just do what he's already planned, and no one wins.
Posted by Ricardo on February 16, 2011 at 4:33 PM · Report this
83
AHA: does he ever date women, sleep with women, talk to you or anyone else about women? Not solid proof one way or another, but the way he talks about them may provide some clues.

It's possible that he's so narcissistically focussed on his own pleasure, not much caring where it comes from, that straight/bi/gay has no functional meaning for him and he calls himself "straight" because it's easier socially. The hand job(s?) could just be his way of reciprocating - since he has enough manners to realize he should - without actually doing anything he considers intimate.

The much simpler explanation is that he's not yet comfortable admitting he's bi. If your attraction to him is mostly physical and friendly, stop worrying about making him accept the correct label and just enjoy your odd bedfellow.

If your attraction is getting romantic and you're hoping he'll admit to being bi AND to having feelings for you - pushing him to come out before he's ready increases the likelihood of him blowing up at you and stomping out of your life. You'll have to decide for yourself whether it's better to take that risk or not.

What you should NOT do is make yourself physically available to him while silently pining for his affections, or worse, lying to yourself about any romantic feelings you may have. You don't owe it to him to enable his denial at the expense of your emotional well-being.
Posted by MsChris on February 16, 2011 at 4:40 PM · Report this
84
@ #11 - You are a fucking idiot.

@ #47 - Exactly. <3

@ #48 - For the love of all that is fucking right, please understand that being BISEXUAL DOES NOT EQUATE POLYAMORY It's a common misconception.

@ Dan - Excellent responses.
Posted by CoffeeCups on February 16, 2011 at 4:44 PM · Report this
85
TYTF -- definitely mid-life crisis. Perhaps monogamy isn't for him, but he's been doing it for a full decade, so I'm not so sure if it's an issue of wanting an open marriage.

Sounds like text book mid-life crisis. Get to that point where the decisions you've made lead to regret or double thinking those carefree days of youth and all the paths you didn't choose. But you've got to remember that there is a lot of good from the path you have chosen. Love isn't all novelty and infatuation---it can be a lot more, if you let it. But getting older is scary and it seems like this guy is reacting like a lot of folks do when confronting their own mortality in a mid-life crisis: trying to recreate situations of their youth (i.e. nailing the cute barista) when it's not about that at all.

At the very least, this guy has to talk to his wife, and perhaps a counselor to see if this really is an issue of someone wanting out of a happy, stable monogamous relationship, opening the relationship up or, what I guess is more likely, some misplaced feelings of fear and loss of youth parading around as mistaken lust.
Posted by KL on February 16, 2011 at 4:46 PM · Report this
86
My 1st comment is TYTF's letter is the best in months. No poo-eaters, no totally disconnected women-- , just a somewhat extended 7yr-itched-type hetero looking for blessing. The column is full of gender war and etiology of marriage. I love it. Very entertaining.
Posted by Hunter78 on February 16, 2011 at 4:56 PM · Report this
87
Spot on again, Dan, to TYTF! Another great column!

This is only one of a zillion reasons why I will never get married again, and am better off single. The last thing I'd ever want is to be dumped in my 40s by some mid-life crisis whining lookist schmuck who'd only get bored with Malibu Barbie once she turned 25.
I agree: boredom goes both ways.
Posted by auntie grizelda on February 16, 2011 at 4:57 PM · Report this
88
@81, who doesn't? Aside from all that sand...

I'd actually like to see Mr. and Mrs. TYTF dress up, go to a bar together, pretend they don't know each other, and flirt their heads off with strangers. He'll get to stretch his wings a bit, and his wife will suddenly seem less "boring" when he sees other men cross the room to buy her drinks just because she smiled at them.
Posted by MsChris on February 16, 2011 at 4:58 PM · Report this
89
FYI: The BJ contributor in question is "Mistermix," not "Mastermix."
Posted by Buck Rogers on February 16, 2011 at 5:26 PM · Report this
Helenka (also a Canuck) 90
AHA
Whoa! Three letters and (at least) three deluded people.
TYTF
You and your "girl" (sic) were on the same page 10 years ago until you married and had kids (number of kids unknown). I get the impression she's been the one stuck with them which is a very draining existence; but you've also been there engaged willingly with her in all of these boring domestic activities. It's as if both your brains switched from single=exciting to married=boooooring.

Why did it take you 10 years to address the issue (at least to Dan) and come up with (in your mind) the only answer. To get out of the relationship so you can go out and have that exciting high life you used to enjoy. Well, guess what? Behaviour that was considered normal for a young man is less attractive when you know the guy has dumped his wife of 10 years and is less attached to his kids because he's out prowling for fresh meat. Unless you're fabulously wealthy or terrific in bed, who'd want you with all of that baggage.

So, TYTF, instead of all of this "I need", "I want", "I-I-I" whine, how about addressing the monotony that is parked in the monogamy spot first. Talk to her. Say that you remember some of the wild and crazy things you used to do in the beginning and that, though you acknowledge your responsibilities as parents within a more stable family structure, you'd like to recreate some of them. Or even start some new ones.

You want excitement? Then arrange to pick her up in a bar (it could be fancy or a dive), pretending you're strangers (and maybe she won't wear any underwear and will tell you so). Flirt, touch outrageously and leave with each other. Send the kids away to another family member's place and bring her back to your "bachelor pad" if you can't afford a hotel room. But, unless you're going to give your current relationship a shot, you don't get a free pass to run away from your responsibilities to your current family. Bleh to conventional mid-life crises.
CB
Not only are you deluded, but so is your gf. So far, she hasn't been with a woman except for one-night stands. And she has anxiety and self-esteem issues. So is it possible that the only time she's hooked up with a woman is when she's gotten some liquid courage? Or, besides the insecurity, is also uncertain about her sexual orientation. Because she doesn't sound at all sure of herself.

You, OTOH, are old enough to know better, yet are ready to declare your forever true and undying love ... based on the best sex you've ever had ... and some dreams and goals you share. Dan came up with one perfect phrase. I'd like to add another. You say you're in it for the long haul. There's another "haul" I can think of. Stop U-hauling her prematurely! You're freaking her the fuck out.

You don't need to compound it by telling her about how extraordinary the sex is. What if that's something she's never heard before and thinks it's fake flattery. If she's insecure, the worst thing is hyperbole. It's okay to be sincere, but what you're doing is going to scare her away.
AHA
Does it really matter what your "Straight" self-identifying friend calls himself? Right now, he's enjoying some fun sex with you, spends the night in your bed, and he's open to the possibility (at least when he's alone) of going further. Don't push so hard to get him to "admit" he's at least bi (as you are) if not totally gay. If he's not harming anybody by acting outwardly homophobic (which is where loathesome hypocrisy comes in), let him keep his so-far harmless delusion. If it turns out that he is bi/gay, and you haven't pressured him so that he stops being close to you, but have been patient and supportive, you may still get that happy ending with him. And, even if you don't, you won't have wrecked a friendship.
More...
Posted by Helenka (also a Canuck) on February 16, 2011 at 5:34 PM · Report this
91
TYTF,

Ok, let's replay your options:

1) You try to maintain your present relationship of 10 yrs + kids-- perhaps renegotiated.

2) U bail, and seek better pastures. U think u can a4d it.

If u think ur sx life is boring, it's ur fault, U'r the man, fuc her like u want. If she finds it too much, she'll likely cut u some slack.

Ur belief u can remotely support ur children may b misplaced.

R u afraid to fuc t mother of ur children?
Posted by Hunter78 on February 16, 2011 at 5:43 PM · Report this
92
Hey TYTF, I met you the other night where I tend bar. You were the guy with the thinning mullet/ponytail/shaved head and the brand new cowboy boots/ biker boots/versacci shirt, right? You talked about your boring/evil/controlling wife and how much you wanted to get divorced, but you didn't want to hurt your kid(s), then you left me an inappropriately large tip and tried to give me a great big slobbery kiss at the end of the night. That was you, right? Or maybe one of the other dozen, pathetic, forty-ish men I see every night.

Yes, it's a mid-life crisis. No, I don't want to fuck you. Now go home and give your poor wife some decent oral sex. Buy some nice toys from Good Vibrations. And for god's sake, shave off that ridiculous goatee/mustache/soul patch.

Good Luck.
Posted by emmalou on February 16, 2011 at 6:01 PM · Report this
93
@35 I'm sure that a guy can stuff dildos up his ass and not be the least gay. Why not do it in the shower for the sheer pleasure of it? Just because the dildo is phallic shaped makes the act gay?

Also, I think that you can probably get sucked off by a guy on an occasional basis and not really be gay or bi. But what cinches the guy's gayness is the willingness to jerk off another dude. Why would a straight man do that?
Posted by Approaching 40 in LA on February 16, 2011 at 6:02 PM · Report this
94
AHA,

U'r both as gay as the Staten Island Fairy. Is there some rush by homos back into the closet?
Posted by Hunter78 on February 16, 2011 at 6:40 PM · Report this
cyranothe2nd 95
@11--Bravo for that misogynistic, rape-apologistic pile of shit post.
Posted by cyranothe2nd on February 16, 2011 at 6:44 PM · Report this
96
@57 Might depend where you buy your toys. If you go into a Babeland, Good Vibrations, or any other decent sex-apparatus shop, your choice of shape and color might be relevant.

But, if you walk into an average old-style porn store that mostly sells DVDs, the selection of toys can be fairly pathetic. You'd be lucky to find any dildos other than fleshtone, never mind non-representational ones.
Posted by Brooklyn Reader on February 16, 2011 at 8:12 PM · Report this
Sandiai 97
@11. More like... the way you use "spittoon" is why no one will fuck you.
Posted by Sandiai on February 16, 2011 at 8:34 PM · Report this
98
TYTF didn't just say he was bored with sex; he said their entire life was a rut. He is too young for this, he wants to party and drink and fuck around like he used to, he might as well write that he wants a toupee and a sports car too. He's having a mid-life crisis and he doesn't need to have an affair. What he needs to do is get into therapy and learn to live with his age and stop confusing comfortable coexistance with a rut. Happy old couples don't get to be happy old couples by bailing when one of them decides they're just too young to be old.
Posted by charlie on February 16, 2011 at 8:42 PM · Report this
99
You know what else is weird? How TYTF starts off by insisting "I am a straight man." Maybe that's a signal that he's not actually so straight these days. Maybe, like AHA's friend, he has actually been lusting after men. If husbands are generally nervous about asking their wives about extracurricular sex, I bet that goes double if they have to admit that they want to fuck men, not women...

Posted by EricaP on February 16, 2011 at 8:43 PM · Report this
100
"all so you can make an embarrassing pass at a barista who has zero interest in fucking you."

I LOLed.
Posted by Jay234 on February 16, 2011 at 9:57 PM · Report this
101
#11 Professor must be a troll...He's gay but married to a woman whom he's pissed at for not putting out every single day--wtf? What gay man would want to have sex with his female wife every day?
Posted by margerineeclipse on February 16, 2011 at 9:59 PM · Report this
102
OOPS...he was talking about Dan being gay, not himself...still think he's a troll, though.
Posted by margerineeclipse on February 16, 2011 at 10:02 PM · Report this
103
I will join @ 11. I have always felt that the detriment dealt to straight marriage by gay marriage was the absence of ownership. Marriage was an act of slavery, not recognized and then promoted after the french revolution. Basically it boils down to this. If Matt and John have an "equal" marriage. Then how does Ed tell Jodie to do the dishes and cook the dinner?
He can't. Fucker has to help out. We are living in an age where two people finance a family. The traditional lines of marriage establish hierarchy. What are we to do with out it? Boo hoo.
Life goes on, except for those that aren't allowed a paper that says they matter to each other. Funny how said piece of paper tells others how they have to define their marriage. whether it is between a man or a woman, or a safety valve.
Posted by pussnboots on February 16, 2011 at 10:38 PM · Report this
104
I don't think Dan's advice to TYTF is very good here. As @31 said, I think even broaching the subject with his wife could potentially be a kind of emotional abuse, making her feel like the bad guy for not giving him a "safety valve" when really he's the one who is on the verge of failing in his commitment. I'd only advise bringing it up if he thinks there's a real chance she's secretly interested herself. Otherwise, he should cheat discreetly--not because it would be the right thing to do (it's not, he's still a Cheating Piece Of Shit, this doesn't meet sane standards for absolution) but because being a CPOS is better than rubbing her face in how much he wants to be a CPOS.

That said, while the advice ain't great, Dan's lament at the start of the column is fantastic. Monogamy might have a lot to commend it, but take away the risk of procreation, add modern defenses against STDs, and I'm somewhat agog that we'd still make it central to lifelong commitment. Advising the folks trying to juggle sex with domestic commitment often seems futile. It seems the only way to win is not to play.

Maybe these thoughts should be a letter of their own to Dan, but...I'm a gay man with a great sex life and lots of friends, but not much overlap between the sex life and the friends. I've been most comfortable having sex with people I'm not close to, because when the sexual allure wears off we can go our separate ways without at least one of us getting torn apart. And the most stable and rewarding relationships of my life are with people I don't have sex with--or people I've stopped having sex with, so that the waxing and waning of mutual attraction doesn't ruin the relationship. I struggle with this all the time, and can easily believe that mostly I'm just sort of fucked in the head (I certainly don't need to be reminded of that.)

But then I read letters like TYTF's, and it leaves me at least somewhat frustrated that we're fighting huge civil rights battles for the right to marry our sex partners regardless of their gender, while still treating sex as if it's the primary characteristic by which to judge a good marriage match. Secretly, I long for a form of domestic commitment recognized by society and government that just takes the expectation of sex out of the picture altogether. Safety valves and open marriages point in this direction, but they still call for some form of sexual compatibility, even if it's just mutual acceptance that your sex partner has other sex partners. Where's the liberal churches encouraging people to commit domestically just because they love each other and get along well, even if that love is sexless? Where's the activists and columnists making space for that in our social imagination? Why does everyone still seem to think that you *should* want to have sex with the person you'd commit to live with and support and love till death? I wish society's conversation were at least a little bit more open to the idea of serious domestic commitments based on fraternity rather than sexuality.

As for AHA, I doubt getting this guy to call himself bi will get him to enjoy the emotional connection of sex. He's using the straight label as a shield so that he can have sex with you without feeling emotionally obliged, and you're enabling him to do that. I ain't judging--I've been there, and the sex can be fun for awhile.

But in my experience, when he does finally come out to himself about being bi, it probably ain't gonna come with the realization that he wants to deepen his emotional connection with you. Quite the contrary, you're the guy giving him sex without all those pesky emotions. If he ever does open up to the idea of emotional commitment to a man, your previous sexual relationship isn't gonna put you ahead of the game--it's probably gonna count against you. Probably the best thing you can do both for his sexual self-awareness and your own self-esteem is to tell him now that you'd like to *just* be friends. DTMFA.

And now that I've totally laid my own personal hangups about sex and love bare, please be gentle?
More...
Posted by JackDitch on February 16, 2011 at 11:49 PM · Report this
105
TYTF--Dan's right. And speaking as the grown child of an acrimonious divorce, divorce is the gift that keeps on giving--years of child support, fights about holidays, the future grandchildren, wife #2, aka "that slut your father married"...you'll still be tied to this woman for the rest of your life regardless. May as well make a better accommodation now.
Posted by Princess Assburgler on February 16, 2011 at 11:55 PM · Report this
106
@104, interesting perspective. But I think many if not most women prefer some emotional connection with their sex. Even if we're prepared to open our marriages, we're not prepared to live with someone who doesn't find us sexually attractive.

That was the biggest issue for me: if I had concluded that our sex life was over, if I thought that he loved me but didn't lust for me, I don't think I could have stayed with my husband during our upheaval this year. Funny to think of gay guys hoping to get marriage without all those messy sexual relations...
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 12:12 AM · Report this
107
@84 Thank you SO much. Being Bi doesn't automatically mean a free ticket for my partner to sleep with whoever they want. Bi, just like straight or gay, can still be monogamous.
People need to stop with their idiotic assumptions!!!
Posted by XoXo on February 17, 2011 at 12:20 AM · Report this
108
Flailing is doomed. He's got himself convinced that the grass is greener, and a world of poon awaits if he can just dump the boring loser he somehow ended up with. Five or ten years down the line, he'll realize his mistake, but by then she'll be remarried and he'll be one of those pathetic 50-year-olds hanging out at the bars, spending his "wild evenings" making embarrassing passes at bartenders young enough to be his daughters, who will put up with his ass only so long as the lavish tips hold out. Hey Flailing, have fun! Your wife deserves better anyway.
Posted by FLgirl on February 17, 2011 at 3:27 AM · Report this
109
It's not the wife, it's the age. You just don't like being 40.

You want a good role model for how you can be middle-aged, married to the same woman for twenty-five years, and still have a good time? Look at my dad.

He just never let himself get boring. He's ambitious about his career and is constantly aiming higher at an age when most people coast. He's ambitious about fitness, and beats college kids twice his height at basketball. He puts effort into how he dresses -- he looks DAPPER, all the time. He can charm a waitress into giving him extra good service. He isn't going out to wild parties all the time, but he does go out, and he does like fine liquor. He's always been faithful to my mom and loving to his kids, but he HAS A LIFE OF HIS OWN, and it's a pretty damn good life.

When you think about it, it can be better to be a mature man than to be a partying twenty-year-old. You have more authority; you can shape the world more effectively. Think about Jack Donaghy on 30 Rock -- is he having a lousy time, just because he's middle-aged? No, he's on top of the world. It's a matter of confidence and ambition. You're not over the hill, the good part is just starting.
Posted by drizzle89 on February 17, 2011 at 4:57 AM · Report this
110
Also:
if you're not "conservative" by heart, then stop fucking faking it. I've never been married, but I've pretended to be staid and "normal" and it's totally exhausting. You don't have to be Ward Cleaver. Stop telling yourself "I can't do anything I wanna do!!!!" You're a grown man, your wife is not your mother, and if you really want something, you can get it.

Make a list of things you wanna do. Then see -- are any of them feasible? Are you telling yourself you "can't" do something that you could actually do and let off some steam?

If your heart's desire is to go to Burning Man or something, maybe you can do that. If you want to get the kids out of the house and have a sexy weekend, you can do that. People who think they're expected to play a certain role often deny themselves pleasures because they think they're not "allowed" to be themselves.
Posted by drizzle89 on February 17, 2011 at 5:09 AM · Report this
111
@104 (JackDitch), even though I understand your viewpoint (and you put it in a very thought-provoking way -- thank you for that), I think I'm more like @106 (EricaP) above.

I actually think our society already allows quite a number of sexless high-commitment relationships, in some cases legally recognized (parent-child), in others not (friendship). The people in these relationships may live together quite happily.

Still, sex is a powerful reason to be interested in human beings. If we all became sexless, the number of isolated mysanthropes would increase tenfold, I think. In fact, one often sees that sexless relationships, even when those involved are supposed not to lust after each other (siblings, parent-child), often still end up including precisely this element, despite all socio-cultural horror this causes (hence the existence of incest; and the need for an incest taboo).

Sex is powerful. And when you live together with someone, especially someone whose gender is your basic sexual target, it's hard not to consider the possibility. Even if you start out by clearly, cognitivelyl separating away "sex partners" from "life partners".

And the desire to be with one's sex partners, which so often leads to feelings other than simple sex, makes me again agree with EricaP: it's difficult to feel really interested in someone as a life partner without sexual interest being involved. Often enough it won't seem worth the trouble. I don't say it's impossible; by all means, if you can do it, if you can stay truly committed for someone throughout life, with your heart in the relationship, while having no sex (or looking for sex elsewhere), by all means do it.

But I don't think this will ever be a majority strategy. No; I think people for whom sexless life commitment is the best commitment will remain a minority. Most of us will have to go on dealing with sex, romance, and the attending drama in one way or another. (Note that I'm not necessarily saying monogamy; commitments of various kinds are possible.)
More...
Posted by ankylosaur on February 17, 2011 at 5:32 AM · Report this
112
First: TYTF is a douche. There's suffocated and there's self-centred and he is the latter.

Second re @11: I can't imagine why a woman wouldn't want to fuck a man who thinks and speaks of her as a cum spittoon. Trust me, once a month is 12 ore per year than you deserve, scumbag.

Lastly, GymGoth @74 asked this question:
Dan should have explored how to get the "spark" back with his wife. How about a sex therapist?
I think I can field that one. Because, all other things aside, finding a sex-positive therapist is hard; finding a therapist who will even admit that sex is often vital is hard. Most therapists will try to fix the partner who is being refused rather than the refuser, no matter what the circumstances. It is also distressingly common for the therapist to gravitate towards the woman's point of view simply because the therapeutic process is so in line with how women in our culture are are raised and communicate; therapists, like most people, feel more comfortable with and sympathetic towards people who think and talk like they do, and in our society that's women.
Posted by seeker6079 on February 17, 2011 at 6:14 AM · Report this
113
As tired as Dan is of people saying divorce is OK, but non-monogamy is not, I'm tired of people saying sex has to get boring in a marriage, so non-monogamy should be OK.

Yeah, non-monogamy is better than divorce, but it's a distant second best option to actually making the marriage work. Only 1 time out of 100 is non-monogamy going to be what the wife is looking for, too.

TYTF sounds like a garden-variety het male: selfish. He thinks the problem is his wife. "...she has become boring to me." No, YOU have gotten BORED with her. Looked at in that way, the choice isn't: boredom or excitement, divorce or open marriage. It's: give up or work on the real problem.

Figure out what it is about you that's making you dissatisfied with your marriange, then show up for your marriage, remember why you chose this woman to spend your life with, remember all the good things about having a family with her (not just the sacrifices that entails), pour your energy into loving your wife and understanding what she needs, put your creative energy into your sex life with her instead of daydreaming about how much you want to boink the barista. And if you need a relief valve, it's called using your hand (and porn, discreetly).

It makes for less exciting advice in a column, but it's what that prick asshole needs to do. He's just trotting down the same cliched, pathetic path as countless dissatisfied middle aged men before him. Individual selfishness probably shouldn't be our first priority when re-writing the unspoken rules of society, IMHO.
Posted by Centrists Rule the World today on February 17, 2011 at 6:52 AM · Report this
114
@84 and @107
Really? Being bi doesn't automatically mean poly? Wow! My whole life perspective just changed. I had absolutely no idea until you two self righteous douche rockets came in on your high horse to make your own incorrect assumptions about what I do or don't know.

Of course being bi doesn't equal poly. In my case it is and does.
Posted by Hybrid Vigor on February 17, 2011 at 7:31 AM · Report this
115
@ 113 - "remember why you chose this woman to spend your life with"

The problem is that people too often get married because they've been told all their life that they're supposed to, that this is what they should aspire to.

At a certain age, you start believing that you're too old to keep sowing your wild oats, and societal pressure to get married and form a family starts to become unbearable (or merely too annoying). Instead of asking yourself if you really do want to conform to that model, you choose a decent person and get married. Then you hit middle age and realize this is not what you really wanted, that you didn't actually want kids, whatever.

Since you think you did everything right, as you were told to, you don't think you're to blame and you don't try to have that very important talk with yourself about where YOU fucked up and what YOU can do to fix it. Instead, you blame everyone else.

Not trying to defend TYTF, just saying that if people were more honest with themselves before making a lifelong commitment, this sort of situation might occur less often.
Posted by Ricardo on February 17, 2011 at 7:34 AM · Report this
Helenka (also a Canuck) 116
@104
Secretly, I long for a form of domestic commitment recognized by society and government that just takes the expectation of sex out of the picture altogether. Safety valves and open marriages point in this direction, but they still call for some form of sexual compatibility, even if it's just mutual acceptance that your sex partner has other sex partners. Where's the liberal churches encouraging people to commit domestically just because they love each other and get along well, even if that love is sexless? Where's the activists and columnists making space for that in our social imagination? Why does everyone still seem to think that you *should* want to have sex with the person you'd commit to live with and support and love till death? I wish society's conversation were at least a little bit more open to the idea of serious domestic commitments based on fraternity rather than sexuality.

There's a lot to be said for your suggestion because I, too, believe it would provide a more stable and nurturing environment for groups of people. In some ways, we already have had it in the past - in the form of extended families, especially in rural areas - but have lost it in a rush to acquire greater privacy and autonomy by moving to live in big cities. I emvision large pods, with bedrooms surrounding a shared communal space (Hee! I just wrote a story using such a structure) where you'd have a number of diverse people living there (straight/bi/gay, partnered or not, with children or not, unrelated by birth), each of them knowing that they belonged. Oops! Have I just described a commune?

Each group could be convened based on shared principles ... and could approach how to handle differing philosophies of life. I could see some groups deciding that members within would be open to sex with each other as FWB if they weren't already in a sexual relationship, but only after having committed to not be jealous or vindictive should such arrangements not work out. People can decide in advance that they will not react negatively. It takes discipline, but is not impossible.

However, modern Western society is built upon all sorts of binary designations with the most obvious being Male/Female and Single/Partnered. And let's not forget the really important one: Have/Have not.

Even though it's the 21st century, kids are still being raised (for the most part) with the expectation that, when they grow up, they'll get married and have children and a place of their own. This is a standard definition of success. Because of the binary restrictions, there is no wiggle room for any other definition. If you're a girl, you'll fall in love with a boy and vice-versa. Besides, there's that old stereotype that used to govern most relationships: Men gave love to get sex, whereas Women gave sex in order to get love. Yeah ... so fucked up to equate a good relationship with an equation. And I guess that's why society still thinks that sex MUST be a component of a relationship because, otherwise, won't the poor man be frustrated? /sarcasm!

I believe that such a living unit would be a far better place for people who are single (whether by choice or happenstance) to live because, even if there isn't a sexual relationship, there are many relationships formed. And a place to come home to at the end of the day, knowing that there'll be more than just four blank walls and a yowling, hungry cat waiting.

Unfortunately, before such a thing could happen, there would need to be a legal framework in place: perhaps seed money to gain admittance to the group, regular financial contributions towards upkeep to the best of one's ability, and physical and emotional investment in the success of the group. If people wanted to leave, there would be measures in place so that the group would be protected against unnecessary disruption. It's already difficult enough to handle breakups between two people (though those are the adversarial ones). It would require a lot more dedication and persistence to figure out how to ensure that people are looked after, whether they stay in the group or leave it. And, yeah ... Have/Have not would require a fundamental upheaval in a mostly Capitalist mindset that rewards the so-called virtues of 1) getting; 2) keeping; 3) wanting more. Given the current financial/political climate (especially in the U.S.), I may as well consign this one to the category of Fanciful Notions.
More...
Posted by Helenka (also a Canuck) on February 17, 2011 at 7:37 AM · Report this
117
#92 emmalou proclaims "And for god's sake, shave off that ridiculous goatee/mustache/soul patch." Way to try enforce rigid social roles on a guy who's basically pathetic because he's forced himself into a rigid social role of boring married man instead savoring the enjoyment and experimental possibilities that only a long term relationship can offer. You demand that he heads home to play with sex toys and oral sex, but you seem to think that only the young should play with their hair, play with their dress and play their style.
Posted by jinx-n-stinx on February 17, 2011 at 7:44 AM · Report this
118
@115 - It's still chickenshit to second-guess the choice to get married once it's made. If you make that choice (and I'm not saying anyone has to - stay single all your life if you like the thrill of the hunt), then have the courage to own up to it.

I'm with you, though, that people should be honest with themselves before they get married and know the reasons they're doing it.
Posted by Centrists Rule the World today on February 17, 2011 at 8:01 AM · Report this
119
@103

Marriage, n: the state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress, and two slaves, making in all, two.
Ambrose Bierce
Posted by JohnE on February 17, 2011 at 8:11 AM · Report this
120
Thanks to all who replied to 11! I just knew using the spittoon line would get the juices flowing. Let me credit The Hite Report on Female Sexuality for a line I saved away for a rainy day.

As for what I know about marriage: I am a Professor of Sociology so I do know just enough to be dangerous! More importantly I read Dan's column AND Sex at Dawn so I know as much as there is to know: Marriage was an institution created to insure men of their paternity of children and thereby direct his drive towards their care and upkeep. With men in control it effectively turned into an institution of sexual slavery for women. OK, so are we all on board?

So lets knock half of you off board then shall we? With the thoroughly liberated women firmly in charge of the culture if not the actual mechanisms of political power (not yet but soon) we have the spectacle (played out over and over again) of women agreeing to love, honor and cherish and then cutting off and/or severely limiting sexual access to the men AND then using this pernicious institution to insure fidelity- OR ELSE! This is NOT an isolated incident but rather the norm today.

Marriage is a honey trap and this guy- any guy (or girl) who is not getting the sex they want and need from the relationship should have carte blanche to fuck around. End the Repression now!

Finally I note the claim that the ratio of married men with unmet needs to married women with unmet needs is about 30 to 1 has not been disputed. If a couple are fucking like rabbits at the beginning of the relationship and it dries up after a few years and a few kids you can be almost certain it is the WOMAN who has CHANGED NOT the man. He wants and needs to fuck but being "liberated" she feels no need to satisfy him, knowing that courts favor the woman, that she can and will use the children- just like she uses access to her body- as a weapon of control, and that society will condemn him if he tries to escape the trap....
More...
Posted by Professor on February 17, 2011 at 8:54 AM · Report this
pastaefagoli 121
Professor, I agree with you completely, find nothing inherently misogynistic about your words (crass language meant to incite aside) and agree the prevalence of women who enjoy sex on this forum may be proportionally higher than the population at large. An anecdote which is (to me) rather alarming evidence of this: a female coworker of mine made the comment in a group discussion somehow regarding gay men marrying straight women as beards, "It seems like this would be the perfect arrangement, you get to be married, have a companion, but you never have to have sex!" I was appalled! We are the same age (mid 20's), how could this lady have forsaken sexual activity at such a young age? Will her opinion change as she gets nearer her sexual peak in her 30's? Doubtful. I feel sorry for the men who get trapped (and it is a trap) into sexless marriages with women like this.
Posted by pastaefagoli on February 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM · Report this
122
#7: Best comment on lesbian discussions ever.

I think Dan was spot on with his response to TYTF. Yes, TYTF did not specifically state that he wanted to end up in a new committed relationship, BUT this is a much-needed dose of reality. It's a psychological reality that men have a tendency to mentally inflate their self-image - believing they are more attractive than they are, believing they have better chances at hooking up with whoever they want than they actually do, etc - while women have a psychological tendency to do the opposite. Not that every male or female fits this pattern, but it is the dominant pattern.

Chances are, TYTF has a fantasy in his mind of being "free at last" and getting all the pussy he's ever dreamed of, but once he gets out of his marriage, the reality will set in. One reality, as Dan pointed out, is that there's a strong likelihood that the hot little barista is going to tell him to fuck himself rather than agree to fuck him. He will find that his best chances are with women closer to his age, and regardless of the age of the women he hooks up with, he'll find that many of them are interested in having some form of LTR, not just random casual sex with him. And once that reality starts to set in, yes, he will probably find himself in another LTR. And regardless of the flavor of that relationship, it will become "boring" as TYTF seems to define it: patterns will establish, things will calm down and cool off a little, wild nights at the bar will diminish.

If TYTF is truly miserable in his marriage, he should end it. But the question on my mind is whether he is truly miserable, or he's going through something of a mid-life crisis and imagining that without the marriage, his life would be wild and carefree again. He did not imply he's discussed it with his wife, which says to me he's running wild with these dreams in his head, rather than approaching his relationship in a constructive manner. It doesn't sound like she's callous and unyielding to his sexual needs, it sounds like his main complaint is the predictability of his current life. And if that's the case, the problem is likely to be one that he cannot solve in the way he invisions. He should end the marriage if he hates his wife and she refuses to accommodate his needs after honest conversation (like others said, she might be damn bored too!), not because he doesn't want to be "trapped" in a domestic relationship. If he didn't want that, he should never have married and had kids in the first place.
More...
Posted by DrReality on February 17, 2011 at 9:36 AM · Report this
123
@11/120 - Proof that having a degree and being intelligent are not the same thing.
Posted by milena on February 17, 2011 at 9:38 AM · Report this
124
Divorce is the answer! Talking with her is the answer! Therapy is the answer! Go cheat is the answer! Isn't it great how the answers are so easy and obvious?

Here's the thing. Sometimes you marry the person of your dreams. You work every day to keep life interesting. You support each other through thick and thin. Life is a shit storm and you cling to each other with unbreakable love.

She becomes more beautiful every day. You look at her across the breakfast table and her middle-aged hair is a mess etc. But the look on your face is that of a blind man seeing the sun for the first time. Every day.

The only problem is you've grown over many years to be sexually incompatible. So you ask to open the relationship up. No. Go to therapy? No, I don't see a problem/I don't believe in therapy/the sex is fine for me. Cheat? Good luck. Try finding a woman who'll have you without your wife's permission. And even if you could, could you bring yourself to follow through? If you're an honest person it will simply not be something you could ever do. Because you truly, deeply love her and you never will divorce her.

It's lovely that Dan promotes what he does. Once in a while a little advice on coping with "no" would be helpful. Sometimes people decide things unfairly. It doesn't negate everything else.

Sometimes you get the bear and sometimes the bear gets you.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM · Report this
125
milena, if he really is a prof one has to pity his students. they'd probably love to transfer out of his class once they realize what he's like, but run into that most impenetrable of university rules when dealing with such profs: "we hired him, you deal with him".
Posted by seeker6079 on February 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM · Report this
126
@124, how about trolling the internets for women to chat with & see if you can get them to cam for you, while you postpone the meet-up they keep asking for. That way you can keep thinking of yourself as "honest", but still get some heat for your fantasies. Anyway, that's what other guys in your situation seem to do.
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 10:02 AM · Report this
127
@124 - more seriously, there's a book called Passionate Marriage by David Schnarch. Check it out.
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 10:04 AM · Report this
128
@126,127 I really do hope that was a joke. I always look for your comments with interest. I caught my breath when I read that.

I am not other guys.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 17, 2011 at 11:20 AM · Report this
129
Great column this week @11.
Posted by slidebone on February 17, 2011 at 11:39 AM · Report this
130
jenesasquatch, your situation is difficult but very simple. If you've tried openly asking for what you want and been shot down, then you really only have two options.

1. Resign yourself to not getting what you want. Depending on how badly you want it, do that for very long and you may find the experience of looking at her is more like a sighted person staring into the sun at noon. Love means wanting your partner to be happy and fulfilled. Or maybe you just don't want it that badly.

2. Tell her your needs have to be addressed or you're leaving. And if that doesn't do it, then leave.

If you can't cheat and you won't leave, then the person responsible for your lack of sexual fulfillment is you and only you.
Posted by Chase on February 17, 2011 at 11:57 AM · Report this
131
I am so tired of men blathering about their needs in marriage and how wah their wife won't put out and omg what's wrong with her. Please. If you were laying the pipe properly and she was all week kneed and jello thighs and losing her voice from moaning you wouldn't be having this problem. 99% of the reason men are sexually unsatisfied is because their wife doesn't put out frequently enough. You know why? because she probably finds sex boring, exhausting, and sort of like some exercise she has to do at the end of an already very long day because the overwhelming majority of hetero men SUCK IN BED. Worse, women have even been socialized to buy into this. "I don't mind not coming, it's about the journey!" OMG. Can you imagine a man not getting off, not because he was tired or had an illness or whatever, but because he simply wasn't being aroused enough, and still classifying the experience as "good sex"? NO. But women will. And they do it often. When really it's a warm wet sweaty energetic hug.

Sadly, a lot of women actually think they don't like sex or aren't interested in sex. One day they go nuts and fuck their work buddy or their pastor or the UPS guy. And maybe he knows a trick or two and suddenly "omg that's what my pussy is for!" And then they get verrrrrrrrrrry angry that the previous men in their lives sucked so bad in bed.

Don't ever marry someone with whom you do not have blistering wicked red hot ear burning sex. It won't get better. If she took two months to give it up, you'll be the guy complaining she never blows you. Marry someone who likes to fuck as much as you do, the way you do, and don't settle for anything less. Once you find that person, then figure out if your values are compatible because trust me it's a lot easier to stay together fighting over politics than it is to stay together fighting over fucking.

Now on the flip side, if a woman doesn't fuck her guy properly (and no honey once a month with the lights off and "nothing fancy" as some women put it is not enough) then she abdicates her right to bitch when he goes off elsewhere.
More...
Posted by wendykh on February 17, 2011 at 12:20 PM · Report this
132
@118 Agreed.

@122 Word.

I don’t want to be redundant, but I wonder if TYTF suffers from what all of us as human beings are susceptible to suffering from: always thinking the grass is greener on the other side. I wonder if he were currently 39 and never had been married, if he would be bored with having had 200+ sexual partners (random number here) and finding it empty and unfulfilling because he had never had a serious connection with any of his partners. In this, I agree with # 113. Let’s face it, there will always be options that will appear to be more appealing. We can’t control that.

However, I also don’t think the answer is as simple as how you present it @113. I personally believe it is hard and close to impossible for a person who has conditioned their body (and mind) to being sexually fulfilled by having multiple lovers at one time (not necessarily in one setting) or to having “kinky” sex to all of the sudden after saying the words “I do”, instantly be satisfied with sex with one person and/or having conservative sex. I think people are either monogamous or polyamorous. I think parents and society should discuss options with teenagers and inform them how to successfully pursue these options. If they plan to marry a person who wants mutual monogamy, teach them to practice that sexually. If they are willing to be patient and wait for someone who is open to a polyamorous marriage, that is an option too. However, teach them not to lie to themselves or to the people they date and pretend to be someone who is sexually monogamous.

@TYTF, I would say that you also knew going into the situation that you were signing up for one sexual partner for the rest of your life. As a self-responsible adult, you could have and still can communicate to your wife your sexual needs. And as the Sociology prof stated in #120, she signed up to take care of your needs when she married you. This hasn’t changed. The two things that seem to have changed are 1) you may have gotten lazy (as all of us do) with exercising self control when presented with temptations and 2) she may have gotten lazy (as all of us do) with keeping you curious and satisfied.

Although I am not married (consider that as you are reading my advice), I do practice monogamy with whomever I am involved. I can honestly say I enjoy it. I find it very satisfying and the sex between me and my partner only gets better with time. Fortunately, I have had partners who were just as open to new experiences as I am. However, I generally try to have that interview to find out if we are sexually compatible as I am getting to know them.
More...
Posted by Talibu on February 17, 2011 at 12:29 PM · Report this
133
To the Professor: if you're redux of evolutionary psychology is to be believed (the field itself a grotesque reduction of human behavior) why do men so readily turn their backs on their children's welfare upon divorce? After all, this court system you've described only "punishes" those men who resent having to care for their children. The implication lurking there, to my mind, is that the man doesn't feel obligated to take care of his children should the wife spurn him in some way. If, as is the maxim of evolutionary psychology, male competition and behavior is simply a matter of ensuring the survival of his offspring, how do you explain that the courts have to intervene to force a good number of men to care for their children after divorce?

I think this every time I hear a man ranting about the legal system "favoring the woman"--apparently he doesn't think his children need food or shelter in his absence?

In short, evolutionary psychology is too often used to justify a post-feminist misogyny. The only difference between your #11 post and your followup was that the former was a more true reflection of your feelings. After all, maybe you should pay more attention in your sociology classes, cuz they get this shit right.
Posted by maddy811 on February 17, 2011 at 12:31 PM · Report this
134
We are not taught to navigate aging, in or out of relationships, with grace or dignity. The term "mid-life crisis" is used as a joke ("just get a red sportscar!"). No one wants to admit they are having one. Rather than seeing these feelings of boredom, being trapped, mourning the loss of our youth as an opportunity for personal growth, we flail, and break people, including ourselves.

I think Flailing needs counseling. It may be that his marriage can be opened, or refreshed, but until he goes through the process of working through some of these perfectly normal life-stage appropriate feelings.

I would also recommend the book "Mating in Captivity" by Esther Perel.
Posted by librarypeg on February 17, 2011 at 12:48 PM · Report this
135
@ 118 - "It's still chickenshit to second-guess the choice to get married once it's made"

My point was precisely that this wouldn't happen so much if they thought about it beforehand.

People second-guess their choices about just about everything all the time, especially if they didn't actually make that choice but only caved in to societal pressure (buy a house, get married, have children, go on this radical diet, listen to Lady Gaga, go see this movie, become a doctor, buy a sports car, whatever).

All I'm saying is that everyone should get to know him/herself better before involving others in their personal mess. Unfortunately, in the real world, most of the time, we do that by involving others and later realizing we fucked up our life and theirs. "Live and learn", as they say.

When you don't learn from those experiences, though, and you keep blaming others for the mess you've created for yourself, THEN you really are chickenshit.
Posted by Ricardo on February 17, 2011 at 12:58 PM · Report this
136
@wendykh, do you really think a man can stay happily married to a woman he is sexually compatible with and not morally or politically compatible with? From what I understand, men date women they love to fuck but marry someone who is compatible with their personalities. They may bitch about the sex after the marriage (as we are seeing), but I don't think men view sexual compatibility as a long run necessity. Hmm...I suppose this is the reason for this column.
Posted by Talibu on February 17, 2011 at 1:02 PM · Report this
137
jenesasquatch@128 - didn't mean to offend. I chat with a couple of guys who won't divorce their wives but who want more diversity in their sex lives. I'm half-amused/half-annoyed by the phenomenon of guys who won't have outside sex but will do sexy chat with me. Just tell your wife already, I tell them, and we can meet! But that's not what they want. Either because they worry what she'll say, or because they don't want her to be able to screw around, or because this is just more convenient -- the chat is what they want. If that's not applicable to you, so much the better.

My post @127 was serious though. That book was very helpful to me this year.
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 1:23 PM · Report this
138
Thank you, Erica. I will take a look at it, but if it wasn't clear from what I wrote, passion isn't lacking for either of us. Nor is mutual respect. That's the point that gets lost in these discussions. That's what is missed by the people above who trivialize my comments and my life.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 17, 2011 at 1:38 PM · Report this
139
Hey, "Professor"... why not shut the fuck up and take that shit to a therapist? You clearly need help far worse than many who write in to Dan for advice.
Posted by Professor is an asshole on February 17, 2011 at 1:38 PM · Report this
140
marriage is like many things...it is a living and breathing entity that you have to adjust your style to after time. What works in the beginning obviously does not work 10 plus years down the road. If having an open valve works...hey! Who the fuck cares? Honestly, I would not care if my husband went out and got laid occasionally. I am just that fucking kinky. Hearing "war" stories is a thrill to me. Monogamy is overrated and if you can make a marriage work with HONESTY...then it is so much better.
Posted by mandi ben on February 17, 2011 at 1:39 PM · Report this
141
@130:

As for option 2:

She gets the house, the kids, the car, and you get $85,000 in legal fees.

You can also skip divorce entirely and be legally separated but married in perpetuity. Tell anyone that you're having any sort of relationship with that you're still married and can't get out. I suppose that's another alternative.
Posted by gromm on February 17, 2011 at 1:44 PM · Report this
142
TYTF,

WTF ever. Grow up and realize that you have managed to bring children into the world with this woman. Now get off of your high horse and realize that a) your sex life probably bores the shit out of her too and b) try some honesty!

I honestly would love it if my man would get that kinky and have some "war" stories to fantasize about. I am a bisexual and HONESTY works wonders...tell the truth about what you want out of life and quit trying to fit into the mold of perpetual asshole that many fall into. Men and women typically are not meant to be "tied" down but it is mutually advantageous to raise children together and have a haven and home for them. Put em to bed; get GMA and GPA over...you and the wife do your own thangs or do those thangs together but do so HONESTLY! Just my thoughts.
Posted by mandi ben on February 17, 2011 at 1:48 PM · Report this
143
@138 maybe you could try explaining to us what the real problem is, instead of being coy? You wrote: "She becomes more beautiful every day...The only problem is ...we're sexually incompatible." And now you say "passion isn't lacking for either of us."

Okay, so what is the basis for your incompatibility? Has one of you recently come out as gay? That's a different kind of issue than most married-guys-who-want-something-extra. Maybe you don't want actual advice, but you posted enough about your situation to intrigue several of us. We don't mean to "trivialize" your problems, but clearly you haven't given us enough information to understand your relationship.
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 1:52 PM · Report this
144
@ 141 - If people weren't so hung up on getting married for marriage's sake (because of the social recognition/advantages that come with it), that could be a very good alternative.

I never could fathom why people want to get married a second (third, etc.) time. Wasn't the first marriage enough of a lesson? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice...
Posted by Ricardo on February 17, 2011 at 1:56 PM · Report this
145
@ 143 - I thought that was a hypothetical example.
Posted by Ricardo on February 17, 2011 at 2:05 PM · Report this
146
@38 wanna break another cherry :-)
Posted by jaansdornea on February 17, 2011 at 2:35 PM · Report this
147
@116 (Helenka)


I believe that such a living unit would be a far better place for people who are single (whether by choice or happenstance) to live because, even if there isn't a sexual relationship, there are many relationships formed. And a place to come home to at the end of the day, knowing that there'll be more than just four blank walls and a yowling, hungry cat waiting.

Unfortunately, before such a thing could happen, there would need to be a legal framework in place...


Totally. Not just a legal framework, but a social one...peers who are willing to give respect and encouragement to those kinds of relationships.

Conservatives have equivalents to this, with fraternal orgs on the light end of commitment, and religious orders on the heavy end. I'm not gonna hold up the Jesuits as the route to a happy sex life, but if you took away the repression of a celibacy requirement and introduced the kind of communicative flexibility we see in "open marriages" and polyamory, they're a lot closer to what I envision than anything I'm seeing the left fight for. I don't know if it's possible, but the lack of such a thing does seem like a big hole in the typical liberal vision of society--it's the angle that we're not even considering as we liberalize our view of domestic commitment.

Keep in mind that there are also real legal hurdles to setting up any sort of domestic partnership with more than one person. Until Obama fixed it, hospital visitations could be difficult. Health care is still difficult.

And right now, my sights are set on occupancy laws that limit the number of people who can live in a house based on their family relationships. That is to say, three adults who are legally related might be allowed to live in a house, but they wouldn't if they weren't related (so it's got nothing to do with the actual capacity of the house.) Such laws are common enough, having bitten both myself and single/poly friends through the years as we've explored alternative domestic arrangements. So there's not just a lack of encouragement for such things, there's express discouragement out there.

@106 (EricaP) and those who've echoed her:

I'm not even gonna dig into the many/most women/men/people debates, except to say that I'm not so sure the sex-centered vision of marriage you're talking about represents the average sentiment better than the damned-near chaste vision of marriage promoted by conservatives. Amongst those conservatives are many whose hearts would break a little to hear someone speak of leaving a *loving* spouse for lack of *lust*.

Unlike those conservatives, I don't think lust can just be disregarded--it's a biological need, like eating or pissing, and simply denying somebody sexual outlets can really mess them up--hence open marriages, safety valves and good old-fashioned affairs.

But personally, I'm positive that "I'm gonna lust after you till death do us part" is not a commitment I could ever keep towards ANYBODY--being *expected* to be lusty is one of the biggest turnoffs in the world to me--and those legions of conservatives out there do give me hope that there's plenty of people out there who share my priorities in this regard.

It's love and familial obligation that I'd be willing to commit to till death do us part. That's the kind of commitment I think government and society has a responsibility to encourage. I just wish I had more options for that than the sex-centered vision of the left and the sex-deprived vision of the right.

I don't propose any easy or immediate answers, I'm just tossing out my thoughts and desires. Thanks to all those who responded to them; even where I disagree or am bothered, that was some thought provoking feedback.
More...
Posted by JackDitch on February 17, 2011 at 2:46 PM · Report this
148
@143 You don't trivialize. I wouldn't respond to you if you did. Mapping out who is to blame or saying someone forgot/never knew how to fuck is trivializing.

I don't mean to be coy and I'm not looking to have my problem solved. I'm just saying there are things to accept in life. It's all well and good to advise someone to communicate or cheat or lie or divorce. Sometimes you tell the truth, communicate, get told "no", and stay together. That's something to think about. Maybe that ability makes for stronger love and a lasting marriage.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 17, 2011 at 3:15 PM · Report this
149
@148, One reason I said 'yes' to opening my marriage was that my husband told me he had already cheated. I felt I had a choice between divorce, or opening the marriage, because I felt I couldn't trust him to just stop having outside sex. Maybe we could instead have worked for years on rebuilding my trust that he wasn't lying to me... I didn't see that choice at the time.

If you are able to accept her 'no', and if she is able to trust that you accept it -- then you guys have a wonderful relationship, and I'm jealous. I'm sorry it isn't always fun for you; if it helps, our arrangement isn't always fun for us, either.
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 3:27 PM · Report this
150
Great comments from most posters. One point to add: Has TYTF given serious considerable to his reaction (emotional, visceral) to his wife having hot sex with multiple younger men? His selfishness makes me wonder if that isn't the kind of "open" he is envisioning. If TYTF is happy to babysit while the wife gets some on the side, then maybe they can talk about opening things up.
Posted by wxPDX on February 17, 2011 at 3:57 PM · Report this
151
re: Too Young To Flail (wants to fuck around).
the three choices have been laid out here already.
1. Have an affair
2. Work on improving what you have
3. Divorce.
I want to address #2- working on what you have.Don't assume what you have is the best you CAN have.
I am a woman who has been married for 36 years. My married sex life has been a huge bore from day one. Nice man. Bad fuck. I chose option 1 to keep myself sane. Without making a public announcement to him.

Now- 36 years into this thing my husband all of a sudden decided to become a good lover for me. Wants our golden years to be golden indeed. He is monogamous, it is not like he learned this stuff from someone else. But he saw he was losing me and started to use his imagination.

Hey- this is possible for you too. Work on it. You have all that history together. It takes two to tango- or fuck in this case. Before you go out and bore a new partner get off the internet porn sites and read a book or read some internet sites about how to satisfy a woman. How to do new stuff. As someone older and much wilder than you, believe me, you have NOT seen and done it all.
Posted by Sunset on February 17, 2011 at 4:03 PM · Report this
152
@131 and @121

I'm with you two. I'm shocked when I hear a woman complain about having to have sex with her husband. Sex is supposed to be FUN, isn't it? Why would you marry someone who isn't any good in bed?

Hell, I don't even stay the night if the guy can't get me off, let alone a lifetime.
Posted by blah on February 17, 2011 at 5:01 PM · Report this
153
@149 Your strength comes through in your comments. That's partly why I look for them. You really boiled it down there. It's not always fun. All my best to you.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 17, 2011 at 5:27 PM · Report this
154
@11: Um...sorry, Professor, but I can't agree with you about marriage.
While the idea that "marriage was designed to keep men faithful providers for their wives and children" is a lovely thought, and when it works, It's a Wonderful Life, it doesn't always turn out that way, does it?

And you never answered my question: What are you a professor OF, exactly?
Posted by auntie grizelda on February 17, 2011 at 6:04 PM · Report this
155
@84: RIGHT ON!!! @11 is a Professor of Idiocy 101!!!
Posted by auntie grizelda on February 17, 2011 at 6:07 PM · Report this
156
I dont understand this, have we really become this complacent? How can anyone conceive marriage as a trap, youre not forced into it, you can "escape". Didnt you marry because you were ecstatic at the thought of spending the rest of your life with this person. Not Oh ill give it 10 - 15 years and then see if i feel like fucking someone else in which case we'll just change the rules. Its just so damn self indulgent. Why isnt marriage celebrated as two people celebrating their love and commitment to each other? And why are we divorcing sex from marriage? How could you even contemplate becoming that intimate with someone outside youre marriage? Not even just marriage but LTPs. How does it not make you recoil in disgust? How is the other partner supposed to accept the fact that you want to lie naked with someone, kiss their neck, stroke their face, share that beautiful bond. If you are why isnt this ringing huge alarm bells, never-mind, oh we're sooo chained in by social conformity maaan, lets free the love. If you dont want the commitment that comes with marriage dont enter into it and dont start a relationship with someone who wants it. I can see that after a few years the relationship changes and there isnt the passion of lust and you dont require sex as much because there are other ways you are expressing your love for each other, a state of absolute contentment with someone. But to say, I really want sex just not with you...whoops, my bad, sorry. Doesnt that mean youve become friends, not lovers? So many people seem to be ok with having their damned cake and eating it and opening a world of pain for everyone close to them because they have their "needs" and my God forsake us if we dont satisfy those needs. It would be a crime to nature! It is indeed your duty to fuck around. What?! Giving yourself license to sleep with someone else or simply sleeping with someone not because youre in love with them or madly attracted to them but because youre bored...BORED!!?? Rationalization is the salvation of fools. It causes me physical pain to think I could do that to my partner, that there could be anyone else but him to be my friend and my lover. And I cherish every moment we're sat infront of the tv, or grocery shopping or taking the cat to the vet, or making love. Fuck you TYTF you deserve all the shitty angst youre marinading in and more and I pity that one too many shot of jacks that led to your poor wife agreeing to marry and breed with you.
More...
Posted by jokesalot on February 17, 2011 at 8:31 PM · Report this
157
...besides, there's nothing that makes you a hotter guy to women than that wedding ring. Once you you actually leave your marriage, the hot women freak out and fade away. Been there, so have many guys, and that's not so interesting.

But I'd really like to hear from one of the women who fuck married guys why they lose their luster once they aren't married anymore. Extra points if you laid lots of guilt trips on him for cheating on his wife and begged him to leave her.
Posted by Token Straight Old dude on February 17, 2011 at 9:50 PM · Report this
158
@153 - likewise, I'm sure :)
Posted by EricaP on February 17, 2011 at 11:13 PM · Report this
159
probably most simple and best advice given to most common complaint for monogamous couples. Now just all of us who have this problem have to ball up and do it.
Posted by bagel on February 17, 2011 at 11:35 PM · Report this
160
@115 Where might I find these men that feel societal pressure to get marred and form a family? I only seem to meet the nearly 40 year olds that give me lame puppy dog eyes and say stuff like, "I'm just, ya know, not ready for a girlfriend, ya know".

All of the women I know that are married basically gave long term boyfriends ultimatums: propose or we're breaking up. I disapprove since I'm probably foolishly looking for a loving partner (marriage be damned) not some schlub of a husband to manipulate (I'm single though so clearly I'm doing it wrong), but I'm thinking a lot of men get married more out of laziness than societal pressure.

Breaking up, dating can be hard. I think guys like TYTF got married because they loved the woman they were with enough and at the time remembered how hard it is out there to break up and start over. Ten years on, yeah, dating is all rose colored memories.
Posted by MissmissSeattle on February 18, 2011 at 4:03 AM · Report this
161
jenesasquatch your problem is not that your wife isn't putting out. Your problem is you told your wife something upsets you, you have a problem, you're hurting, you want to work on it with her, and she essentially told you to go fuck yourself. Actually in this case she literally did. Since she doesn't see a problem, there isn't one. That my friend is a way bigger problem than your lack of a sex life.
Posted by wendykh on February 18, 2011 at 4:15 AM · Report this
162
@157 many of my friends and I noticed that when men got divorced they wanted to get married again about 10 minutes later. They like companionship. They like someone to cook, keep house, do laundry, buy his mother a birthday gift, etc. Meanwhile before you married him he bought you champagne and fucked you in the jacuzzi. He never blinked when you wanted to go to SexyUpscaleRestaurant. Now he says "oh but babe I just love your cooking more." And I know you men all think we women pack on pounds but every man I know got a huge beer belly within 3 years of marriage and we don't find that any sexier than you find it when we don't lose a pound of baby weight. Least we had an excuse to pack on the weight. We notice you shower less, aren't getting as many haircuts, expect us to do stupid errands your secretary should be doing, and then leave us home with toddlers while you go have anal sex and cocktails with your secretary (now we know why she was too busy to do your errands). So many of us say FUCK THAT you can STAY married.

Plus, honestly, we don't KNOW YOU when you're married. We fuck you once a week in a hotel room and have stolen dinners out of town. We think you're fabulous and your poor unappreciative bitch wife just doesn't GET YOU like we do. Then you divorce and we spend more time with you and it's "oh. You mean you're not just a big dick and a wallet? You're actually kind of an asshole and treat service persons like shit and call your teenage son a faggot and what the fuck do you mean you're allergic to cats?"

But see while we're just fucking you, if you're doing it right, that's intoxicating. Women get amazingly stupid when they're getting fucked good and proper. Good sex is like opium.
Posted by wendykh on February 18, 2011 at 4:36 AM · Report this
163
@161 You seem like an angry person. My wife would never tell me to go fuck myself. Some things just don't work out or are just not possible. Resentment and bitterness are not the answer. Anyone promoting communication needs to recognize that communication is a process. It's not necessarily getting the answer you want. It does no good and is not mature to curse the sky for raining on you.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 18, 2011 at 5:48 AM · Report this
164
@11 - Wow, I am absolutely mind-boggled that no one wants to sleep with your baked middle-aged ass. I'm sure every girl in a 30 mile radius is just dying to throw themselves at the first idiot misogynist they come across!
Posted by Jen1983 on February 18, 2011 at 7:05 AM · Report this
echizen_kurage 165
A few other commenters have already mentioned this, but TYTF's idea of fun -- "nightlife, crazy friends, and good drink" -- sounds about as exciting as watching paint dry on a white picket fence. (By "crazy friends," I assume he means "friends who are also into clubbing and drinking.") I suspect that a significant part of his problem isn't sexual boredom, but just boredom, full stop. He should try to improve his sex life with his wife, absolutely, but he should also find some sort of hobby other than remaining a perpetual fratboy.
Posted by echizen_kurage on February 18, 2011 at 7:22 AM · Report this
Helenka (also a Canuck) 166
@147 (JackDitch)

Totally. Not just a legal framework, but a social one...peers who are willing to give respect and encouragement to those kinds of relationships.

Conservatives have equivalents to this, with fraternal orgs on the light end of commitment, and religious orders on the heavy end. I'm not gonna hold up the Jesuits as the route to a happy sex life, but if you took away the repression of a celibacy requirement and introduced the kind of communicative flexibility we see in "open marriages" and polyamory, they're a lot closer to what I envision than anything I'm seeing the left fight for. I don't know if it's possible, but the lack of such a thing does seem like a big hole in the typical liberal vision of society--it's the angle that we're not even considering as we liberalize our view of domestic commitment.

Keep in mind that there are also real legal hurdles to setting up any sort of domestic partnership with more than one person. Until Obama fixed it, hospital visitations could be difficult. Health care is still difficult.

And right now, my sights are set on occupancy laws that limit the number of people who can live in a house based on their family relationships. That is to say, three adults who are legally related might be allowed to live in a house, but they wouldn't if they weren't related (so it's got nothing to do with the actual capacity of the house.) Such laws are common enough, having bitten both myself and single/poly friends through the years as we've explored alternative domestic arrangements. So there's not just a lack of encouragement for such things, there's express discouragement out there.

The huge problem I have with the philosophies of Conservative orgs that may fulfill the stated objective of a shared philosophy is that, even if celibacy weren't an issue, they are usually run on a strictly sex-segregated manner (ladies' auxiliary, anybody?), which just emphasizes how the introduction of women into the far more important intellectual milieu will make it impossible for the men to stay focused on their higher calling. [Yeah, right! /sarcasm. "Here, Adam, why don't you try this luscious apple?"]

As for more fluid relationships and living arrangements not being picked up as a significant liberal cause, I think it's because people would first have to agree on what the cause should be (and how to word it); whereas the concept of something such as same-sex marriage is really simple: "Marriage is a union between two people." Perhaps, once the major holes have been patched over after the big causes have been resolved, then there may be time and energy to examine the more idiosyncratic propositions, probably under the banner of greater individual liberty and personal expression.

I'm fascinated by the occupancy laws and the prejudices of the day that may have prompted them. Because, if you limit the number of unrelated adults, you can't have a bawdy house (condoning immorality); or a rooming/boarding house (sheltering lower income people); a frat house (rowdy students) or, yes, a nebulous arrangement of people who may be engaged in polyamory (a threat to conventional marriage and its far clearer moral certainties where faithful=good and unfaithful=CPOS).

But I can still hope for the day (even beyond my lifetime) when it will be easier for people to see that there can be many options for creating their family of choice well beyond requiring sex as a prerequisite.
More...
Posted by Helenka (also a Canuck) on February 18, 2011 at 8:28 AM · Report this
167
@ 160 - You ask "Where might I find these men that feel societal pressure to get married and form a family", then go on to say : "All of the women I know that are married basically gave long term boyfriends ultimatums: propose or we're breaking up".

That's where you can find them: married to your friends.

Had those guys considered their own needs and desires, they would have broken up. If your friends gave their BF's an ultimatum, it's clear that they valued marriage more than the relationship itself... because of the importance society grants to marriage, which is drilled into our minds from a very early age (remember fairytales?).

It's the whole "if he really loves you, he'll marry you" shtick. Well in my opinion, if your friends really loved there BF's, they wouldn't have pressured them into a situation that the BF's clearly weren't so enthusiastic about.

And as a sidenote: Couldn't your friends have proposed themselves if they wanted marriage so much? How sexist is that attitude? In what century do they live?
Posted by Ricardo on February 18, 2011 at 8:29 AM · Report this
168
@162 Great answer! Thanks, Wendy. Sounds like it might be true as well. FWIW, I don't think I've gotten slothful like that since the divorce, but I sure see a lot of guys do. The current project is to keep the gf convinced that the great sex now would certainly dissipate if we move in together (let alone marry). She gets it.

And the funny thing is that my adulterous single gf (the one who blew me off when I divorced like she wanted me to) has now come back around, largely for the reason you give.

Bottom line: the best, least complicated sex with alla the candlelight and tightly-focused attention and energy you could want takes place between two people who are married. But not to each other.
Posted by Token Straight Old dude on February 18, 2011 at 9:06 AM · Report this
169
LABELS LABELS!
I'm an average guy who likes to kill the occasional hooker but that does not make me a murderer.

You can't cubbyhole me!
Posted by Do my own thing on February 18, 2011 at 10:41 AM · Report this
170
@168 - in order for this "best, least complicated sex" to take place, do the married people have to be lying to their spouses? Does that just make everything that much hotter for you?

I think your example shows that many complications follow after the betrayals, even if the sex feels good and simple at the time.
Posted by EricaP on February 18, 2011 at 11:11 AM · Report this
171
@162 & 168.
You are right in IMHO.
And 162, I think much of what you suggest works in reverse for women who divorce and move on to the other man.
The last paragraph of both these posts are probably the definitive answers, if you include men in the "women get incredibly stupid" comment.
Posted by BTR on February 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM · Report this
172
Bwahahahah Wendy! Damn girl, you are sooooooo right.

And all you misogynistic assholes out there, us wives get just as fucking bored with married sex. Perhaps we just handle it a little differently. The idea of leaving my family for (as one poster so eloquently put it) "perpetual frat boy" or girl in my case, status....ummmm, not gonna happen. Obviously, I think everyone agrees, boredom is no excuse. But what if the sex life is broken and just one partner is not willing to step up and play ball?

Then perhaps a discreet affair with another married person; helps everyone stay sane and happier in their marriage. I am laughing so hard at Wendy, as my affair partner has been turning my crank for years now, no one gets me as hot as him. However, if I had to deal with his unemployed ass in a real world situation? Might be a different story. Of course, I don't pressure him to leave....one of the reasons we work so well together. We are both CPOS, which is not our ideal situation for either of us, but neither one of us wants to bang a barista or catch herpes to bring home to spouse.

Lol....and I am totally going to explain the concept of "lesbian" as a verb to all my lesbian friends who don't read SL!!
Posted by badgirl on February 18, 2011 at 12:05 PM · Report this
173
@163: are you trolling for sainthood? wendykh does sound bitter, but she nailed your situation. You're dissatisfied with your sex life (though you still don't have the guts to say why), you've tried to resolve this by talking to your wife, she told you to talk to the hand. Very loving. So either your sexuality really isn't that important to you (maybe you're a "gray-a"?), in which case so what, or it is but you don't have the balls to do anything about it. If you think that's "trivializing" your situation, stop feeling sorry for yourself: most people would call it a pretty accurate summary. Did you really post on Slog expecting sympathy?
Posted by Chase on February 18, 2011 at 12:47 PM · Report this
174
I disagree with the safety valve thing. What will happen is that he'll become infatuated with someone, which will cause him to become a horrible judge of exactly how much time and attention he's spending on the new infatuation. (Because let's face it - infatuations make us stupid.) His wife won't necessarily know that he's cheating, esp. if he's careful, but she will know something is wrong. She'll feel neglected and like something is missing. So instead of a boring marriage, he'll have one that's falling apart. (I admit that maybe a one-night stand with a stranger [and a condom!] might be far less risky to his marriage, but this guy doesn't sound like he'd stop at just one.)

What he should do instead is DO something to make his married life NOT boring. And you do that by starting to do all the little courtship gestures you did when you first got together. If he likes going out to have a drink, get a babysitter and take his wife with him. Maybe she'd like a break from the kids, too. It means more time and effort, sure, but that's what makes a marriage different from having a boyfriend or girlfriend.

I usually like Dan's advice, but he's completely wrong on this one. An affair would only destroy what he's trying to save, even if he never gets caught.
Posted by Diagoras on February 18, 2011 at 12:47 PM · Report this
175
Oh, and one more thing @163: it may not make sense to you to curse the sky for raining on you, but

(a) your wife is a person, not an inanimate weather phenomenon

and

(b) anybody with any sense would get an umbrella or come in out of the rain.
Posted by Chase on February 18, 2011 at 12:51 PM · Report this
176
The only thing #11 has right is that most wives aren't going to be down with the pressure valve relationship. I wish more women could see that they stand a BETTER chance of staying married if they let their husbands have a little on the side.... rather than throwing them out for it.
Posted by science chick on February 18, 2011 at 2:09 PM · Report this
177
@176, I agree with you, but I think it's important to acknowledge that the marriage doesn't go on the same after it opens up. Both parties have to let go of the "happy-ever-after" Cinderella true-love understanding of their marriage, and accept that each partner is more independent of the other & more flawed than in storybook romances. People have to be willing to live their lives as realist fiction (think Flaubert, Twain or Fitzgerald) rather than as romances.
Posted by EricaP on February 18, 2011 at 2:18 PM · Report this
178
The big problem with just asking the wife to be able to see others is that even if the wife herself doesn't care about some extra-curricular activities, she is probably terrified her friends/family will find out that you are sleeping around. That's the real fear - having to explain at Thanksgiving why your husband is getting it on with the barista.
Posted by biggie on February 18, 2011 at 2:21 PM · Report this
179
@176, Actually the rate of wives cheating is almost as high as the rate of husbands cheating. Just because most wives will say no to opening up the marriage doesn't mean women are less likely to want some on the side. Of course, I suppose it's possible that the same women who cheat are different women from the same ones saying no to opening up a marriage, but it's human nature to want to have our cake and eat it, too, right?

Anyway, having some on the side usually creates more problems than it solves since the cheater spouse usually ends up neglecting the other spouse, even if they try not to. So, even if you never get caught you end up wrecking havoc on your marriage.

The "safety value" idea is a complete overreaction. He didn't say his wife refused all sex permanently, just that his life seems "boring." But there are so many ways for him to make it not-boring in ways that include his wife.
Posted by Diagoras on February 18, 2011 at 2:29 PM · Report this
180
@167
I think society has drilled it into our (I could argue SOME) of our heads because marriage is still the best form of security for a woman.

A woman has a lot to gain from marriage: socially, emotionally, financially. The longer women put off marriage, the less chance they have of getting married, or at least having as much social/financial/emotion gain if they had married younger.

Yes, you can do all those married things either as a long term couple or even by yourself... buy a house, have kids. But because of how our society is structured, you're doing these things without as much of a safety net. In a society where women still 1) make less than men 2) still bear the brunt of child care and 3) have a limited time frame in which they can have children AND careers, it can create a HUGE sense of anxiety to sit there and wait and wait and wait for the man to catch up.

I don't think it's as simple as the girlfriends who pressure guys to propose don't love them. The girlfriends are just recognizing that they and the guy may not be on the same time line, and that their window of opportunity is shrinking a lot faster than his. They then put the guy on alert... Either I get what I need or I move on to where I can get it.

How is this any different than what Dan suggests for people (mostly men) who are not getting their sexual needs met at home?
Posted by Martychan on February 18, 2011 at 3:15 PM · Report this
181
@178 Yes, and Dan made reference to how society pushes hard for divorce --will accept divorce readily while hammering people for their open marriages.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 18, 2011 at 3:19 PM · Report this
182
@jenesasquatch: some responses you've received may be a bit snarky in tone, but they're still on to something. From your first note, this bit is particularly tough to get past:

"Go to therapy? No, I don't see a problem/I don't believe in therapy/the sex is fine for me."

But, but, but: YOU DO have a problem, and you TOLD her that you have a problem, so for her to say that she "doesn't see" it means that she is deliberately refusing to hear you. YOU find the sex not-fine. YOU are hoping that therapy can help. She shouldn't get to decide for both of you that because the problem doesn't exist for her, it doesn't exist at all, or is too trivial to fix. Your needs and feelings are as valid as hers. The health of your partnership should be just as important to her as it is to you. That one of you is frustrated and the other apparently doesn't care, at all, means the relationship is developing a fault line along which it will eventually crack in some way, making both of you unhappy.

So I'm wondering what might underlie her resistance to therapy. (Yes, I know plenty of people don't believe it can help at all with anything. But at the risk of perpetuating gender stereotypes, I find it very hard to believe that she would not be the one asking you to go for therapy if she had a serious concern that you absolutely refused to acknowledge or address.)

Many people approach couples therapy with the mindset of "once the counselor hears my side of the story, s/he will agree that I'm right, and you'll have to do/give me what I want." Which a) is not at all motivating for the other person, and b) is not really what therapists are supposed to do. They're supposed to guide the couple in having constructive discussions and developing solutions and coping strategies that they both can live with.

So maybe your wife thinks that you're convinced you're right and she's wrong, and that you're just looking for a professional ally to help push her into a solution that would make you happier while making her miserable. On the flip side, maybe your wife is convinced that she's right and you're wrong, and there's no point wasting money to be told so.

It's also possible your wife suspects that a therapist *would* tell her that she's shutting down communication, refusing to consider whether your concerns are valid and whether she could compromise a bit more - and that she's already decided there's nothing she's willing to do to accommodate you in any way - hence the "I don't believe in therapy" dodge.

You may need to try again (and again, and again) to explain how important this issue really is for you (assuming it really is), without making her feel as if you're looking at things from the right-vs.-wrong perspective, blaming her for the problem itself, or expecting a specific outcome that will favor you at her expense. Something along the lines of, "I'm frustrated by this situation, and I'm disappointed that you won't acknowledge how I feel and work with me to find solutions we can both live with." Ask her *why* she doesn't believe in therapy. Ask her *why* your frustration is not a problem for her.

If you've already had that conversation over and over again ad nauseam and her answer hasn't changed, then it really could be that she simply cares less about your feelings than you do about hers. Advice columnists often tell people that if their partners won't go to therapy with them, they should go alone. I can't see how it would hurt to try.

Obviously you're welcome to ignore not-quite-solicited advice from internet strangers. You're the only one who can decide when enough is enough, but I hope you'll come to some workable solution before your marriage sustains significant damage. Whatever you decide to do, I wish you the best of luck.
More...
Posted by MsChris on February 18, 2011 at 3:34 PM · Report this
secretagent 183
Wendy is hilarious, if a little angry.

Add 20 or so to the chorus of pretty young things that get hit on by the middle-aged idiots fresh out of (or still "trapped" in)marriage. Happens to me and my girlfriends all the time. I hate to break it to them, but the girls will smile and flirt all night if you're buying. You're still not getting any. Even single, attractive, young men swing and miss most nights. It's cold out there.

This argument about women shutting down sexually in LTRs is as old as time. She used to be hot for it night and day? I bet you used to rub her feet, take her out, tell her she's pretty, go down on her, and bring her treats a lot more too, didn't you? And not just obviously, right before you make a move. We all forget how to be good to each other - it's a human thing, not a man or woman thing. We all take each other for granted.

Posted by secretagent on February 18, 2011 at 3:36 PM · Report this
184
179: From a chating wife: EXACTLY!

Some of my male friends have remarked that they would never open up marriages, smply because women havea much easier time getting laid, and thy know by opening up the marriage, they know their wives will hve the opportunity to fuck around a LOT more then they will. And tis is what binds them in monogamy, as much as they WANT to screw others...its the disparity of availible NSA sex partners.

180: You too hit the nail on the head. Unfortunately, this is why I got married young and foolish. Fortunately, he ended up being a decent guy, even if I did not realize at the time how important sexual compatibility was. I shoulda read Dan younger.

I could almost feel sorry for TYTF....if he didn't come across as sucha whiny tool
Posted by badgirl on February 18, 2011 at 3:37 PM · Report this
185
Lol 183, and all you other cute young 20-somethings who get hit on by creepy 40-somethings! This thirty-something who keeps herself in pretty good shape has soooo much sympathy for you guys! I have moved on to the FIFTY somethings when I go out and play wingman! And that is where TYTF is heading, especially with such brilliant lines as he uses in his letters. I bet he will even brag about his sportscar and sporting a combover and unbuttoned shirt to reveal gray chest hair....

And lemme tell you....its not pretty. Ugh. To quote the immortal Cher from Clueless..."As if"!!! Lol!!
Posted by badgirl on February 18, 2011 at 3:45 PM · Report this
186
@ 180 - That's only true because the US is sorely lacking in other legally-protected forms of partnership.

France's example is interesting in that respect: they created the PACS in the 90's as a way to allow legal gay unions without actually giving gays the right to marry, but they found out recently that it's increasingly popular with straights, because it provides them with all the protection they need, without most of the legal burden that an eventual divorce would entail.

The same could be said about the Netherlands, Sweden, Canada, etc.

If there's only one form of legally protected union, then of course the expectations concerning it become ridiculously high. But that only means that people should lobby their governement for more diverse options. And do they?

The truth is, when you hear people talk about marriage and how they want their wedding to be, and how much money they are willing to invest in the wedding, it's hard not to see the influence of a "fairytale" conception of life. TV and Hollywood movies do nothing to change that, either as they'll tag on a romance to any sort of situation so as to have that requisite happy ending, even though it has nothing to do with the story. But why do they do that? Because the test audiences complain if they don't. And there must be somebody who watches all those "wedding story" shows.

But you're point about the women looking for social and financial gain from marriage is absolutely valid. And that's precisely why many man balk at the thought of it: because many of them feel that their would-be wife is getting married to their wallet. (I am not saying they are right in feeling this way, or that the women aren't justified in their quest for security, just that when you work tending bar, you get to hear that complain a lot.)
More...
Posted by Ricardo on February 18, 2011 at 3:55 PM · Report this
187
@177, everything you say here is also true of most not-open marriages once the honeymoon years are over, no? I guess open(ed) marriage partners can all point to a specific crisis moment when they were forced to acknowledge that they weren't two halves of a fairytale whole, and that they'd have to consciously choose to accept each others' (and their own) flawed individuality - while those in traditional marriages are more likely to have that awareness creep up on them in the form of vague dissatisfactions.
Posted by MsChris on February 18, 2011 at 3:56 PM · Report this
188
@187 - yes. The way I see is it that before a serious marital crisis, you have good days and bad days, where good days often feel as if you are living out a storybook romance. ("Ooh, maybe we should stop being such a cute couple before our friends hate us!") Bad days, not so much.

After a crisis (such as opening up a monogamous marriage, or facing serious illness, or the death of a child), you feel like social freaks even on the good days. (The "you" is rhetorical and an overgeneralization, but perhaps you see what I mean.
Posted by EricaP on February 18, 2011 at 4:17 PM · Report this
189
Re 186 : I meant "your point", not "you're point", of course. Sorry, it's been a long week.
Posted by Ricardo on February 18, 2011 at 4:36 PM · Report this
190
TYTF,

Your position is not that abnormal. You're a normal hetero male. You lust after younger poontang. That don't make you special. What makes you special is your utter callousness at the idea of leaving your professed love and mother of your children.

I'll repeat what I sed b4, ur boring sx life is ur fault, not hers.

We may not b that far apart, cept Im older + yser than u.

Iv bin w my partner 21 yr. Wer not married, but own and made a home together, no childen, but 6 well-luved pets. I lust like crazy after other women.

Her sx drive went dn. Myn remained up. Not unusual. We negotiated, and I got a weekly scheduled f and the permission to cheat-- as long as she didn't know. Of course, none of her gfs. Which is tuff, bcaus I lust after sum of thm.

Unlike you, the thot of hurting her is still a huge threshold 4 me, and 1 Id rather not +.

Im not as successful as Id lik, but really, wer both pretty happy.
Posted by Hunter78 on February 18, 2011 at 5:10 PM · Report this
191
Ah, well. Men vary in their "straightness." Mr. Straight may have no desire to go farther than he is going with his friend and the big dildo. Lots of straight men like to get pegged. If he's alone, it's gay because he got a lifelike dildo? He may sleep with his blow job buddy because his buddy wants it and he is trying to be caring.

But of course it is entirely possibly that he is gay but feels more secure with the gradual approach of jamming a giant dildo up his ass in private before he tries it with someone else. He wants to know what it will be like before he makes a commitment to doing it. Okay. Wait two weeks and see what happens.
Posted by femmeavecchien on February 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM · Report this
192
Also, "lesbian this thing into the ground by communicating it to death." ROFLMAO
Posted by femmeavecchien on February 18, 2011 at 5:25 PM · Report this
193
@182 Thank you for your thoughtful comment. Yes, that was an unfortunate way of phrasing that. The point that I was trying to make really is just: we ended up at "no." I didn't mean to imply that it took only a minute to get there or that "yes" was never seriously considered. And I have been to therapy alone.

It seems I just can't make myself understood. Marriage is hard. You and your partner will have significant problems. You may never see eye to eye on some things. Sometimes that happens, okay? Even when you both put in a first class effort. Stop telling me that that's impossible. I've lived it. My original comment was intended to point it out. It's something to think about due to what I perceive as the implication elsewhere that communication always leads to agreement or harmony. It was not a complaint, not a plea for sympathy or for anything from anyone. Just to give you another perspective.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 18, 2011 at 8:05 PM · Report this
194
@186
But the flip-side is women feel men are dragging their feet on marriage but still dating them just to have access to free pussy.

Women COULD stop giving it up before marriage, but then you run the risk of either being labeled a prude, bringing no sexual experience to the table, or discovering too late your libidos are out of sync.

Granted, I am biased because I am a woman, and I despise the dating/marrying game. It feels constantly like a lose/lose situation. Women have (by and large) loosened up on demanding the ring before they jump into bed, and yet most men STILL balk at marriage. Mature women have stopped whining that a guy is dating her to get in her pants... they get that getting into their pants is PART of the whole thing we call love. So when are mature guys gonna retire the whole terror about "being after the wallet" and realize that security is just as natural a want in love as sex is.
Posted by Martychan on February 18, 2011 at 9:41 PM · Report this
195
@ 194 - "Women COULD stop giving it up before marriage"

I don't know if this is a reflection of how you personally think, but by phrasing it like this, you are kind of reducing marriage to a business transaction, or let's say a series of exchanges of services. A series of obligations. And you wonder why men balk?

Don't women enjoy sex? Shouldn't it be something that they are happy to do and share for their own satisfaction and that of the person they love, married or not, but more so if they say that they want to spend the rest of their life with that person?

If sex is just something that they "give up" in order to attain security, well, am I ever glad I'm gay, because it sounds like that pussy ain't ever free.

In the end, it comes down to this: So what if the guy wants free pussy? He's giving free dick in exhange!

If you don't like the dick you're getting, you shouldn't expect your security from the man attached to it. And if you don't like dick at all, you shouldn't expect your security from a man, period.

This is the 21st Century, you know. Women are allowed to have a career and to create their own security. Just saying.
Posted by Ricardo on February 19, 2011 at 8:12 AM · Report this
196
this is the best savage love in a while..i miss the "hey faggot" greeting from the terminal city days
Posted by old fag on February 19, 2011 at 8:36 AM · Report this
secretagent 197
Hunter 78 - text speak is annoying on texts. From teenagers. This is a blog. Use full words if you expect to be taken seriously by adults. I'm probably 2-3 decades younger than you, and I manage to type all the letters, on a 4 inch phone screen.

Srsly. Ur annoying. Btw, "myn" has 1 ltr < "mine". As does "yser" thn "wiser".
Posted by secretagent on February 19, 2011 at 9:50 AM · Report this
198
@195 "Don't women enjoy sex?" LOL.

Let's just say that there's an awful lot of bad sex out there. And I think that bad sex is still somewhat satisfying for the guy, whereas it can be actively unpleasant for the girl.

Somewhat off topic: I can't tell you how much pressure I'm under, as a girl who fucks "no-strings-attached", to participate in anal. Every fucking guy. If they don't bring it up on the first date, they do on the second date. The PIV sex with these guys is already pretty uninspiring, and now they want anal, which is very difficult for me to enjoy.

Anal is the reason I haven't seen any of these guys more than twice. And I go back to my husband with joy.

There's a reason women like commitment with their sex, and it's called "The Incredible Prevalence of Bad Sex When Dating."
Posted by EricaP on February 19, 2011 at 9:54 AM · Report this
199
Also, did you guys read about this? Apparently the noise women make during sex correlates much more strongly with male orgasm than with female orgasm. http://www.labspaces.net/blog/1186/Why_t…
Posted by EricaP on February 19, 2011 at 9:59 AM · Report this
200
I have a theory, I'll try out on you guys. What if instead of dividing the world's sexual experiences into consensual sex and non-consensual sex ("sex" and "rape"), what if instead we divided by whether everyone participating in the sex was enthusiastic? I won't insist on orgasm; sex can be fun without orgasm.

Would you agree that at least half of the sex acts in the world's history involve one person who was not enthusiastic? Instead of talking about how to reduce date-rape (understandably, no one likes considering the possibility he's a rapist...) Let's talk instead about how to increase the number of sex-acts where both people are enthusiastic participants.
Posted by EricaP on February 19, 2011 at 10:10 AM · Report this
secretagent 201
Yeah, Ricardo, we can do it all on our own! Just like you can pop out kids, have a career, and raise and support them all on your own. One handed! Blindfolded! Uphill both ways in the snow!

Fact is, it usually takes 2 incomes to support a home and family these days, and much of the raising of kids goes by the wayside. So yeah, that swinging dick is needed for more than a good time. Not saying some women aren't capable and willing to bust their asses, alone, to try to be superwoman and supermom and still have some semblance of a life of her own. It's just not that easy. And unfortunately, the feminist message that we can have it all is proving untrue for a LOT of women who did it right: got educated, established a career and financial stability, found a man they like AND love, got married later, and then started on kids. Only to find that the kids were not forthcoming. Turns out, making babies gets considerably harder after 30, for a lot of us.

So yeah, we still wanna get married, and we wanna do it before we have to start laying out some serious (try 50k) cash for fertility treatments, if that's even an option. Though that's not "feminist" or "progressive" and we're judged like hell for wanting it, and wanting it soon.

What's the solution? Know what you want, and pursue it from the beginning. Quit dating people you KNOW you're not going to marry. Men, don't hang around out of obligation, or fear of change, or whatever chicken-shit reason you stay with women who aren't the One or whatever. Women, stop expecting him to change (he won't), don't stay with a man who isn't what you need for fear of being alone, talk about your plans in concrete, reality based ways (no "someday) and if he runs, he wasn't the guy and he just saved you another 2 years.

Nobody wants to be the baby-hungry marriage harpy, but we also want families, and we can't usually wait as long as men. Equal rights, modern feminism, progressive women - none of this changes this biological fact.
More...
Posted by secretagent on February 19, 2011 at 10:15 AM · Report this
202
me @199 - you know what women get out of a long term sexual relationship? Knowledge about how to get her man off (relatively) quickly. When you fuck a lot of guys in a year, and maybe viagra plays a role in this, you would be amazed at the number of guys who last for 45 minutes of fucking. For me, that's not a good thing.
Posted by EricaP on February 19, 2011 at 10:23 AM · Report this
shw3nn 203
@195

I think you are missing what is really at stake for Martychan.

We women do love sex. Also, men do want to have children.

Our desire for sex isn't generally as great as a man's and we can get sex pretty much whenever we want. A man's desire for children isn't generally as great as a woman's and a man can have kids well into his 90s.

These are the points of contention. Men can and do leverage a woman's desire to marry and have children in order to get free, available sex. Women can and do leverage a man's desire for free, available sex in order to get a marriage with children. Clearly, the potential for swindling is rather high. This is why you end up with all this mistrust and suspicion and bargaining power.

This is my favorite thing about not wanting kids at all. I have the luxury the attitude you described.
Posted by shw3nn on February 19, 2011 at 10:30 AM · Report this
204
@ 198 - That was a rhetorical question, in response to someone who talks about sex in terms like "giving it up". I sure do hope women enjoy sex.

I was born in the 60's, so I grew up amidst all the cries of "women have the right to feel sexual pleasure" etc. I find it sad that, as evidenced here, many women still see sex as something you trade for security rather than as something you do for pleasure. I thought we'd grown beyond that.

But I have a bit of news for you (or maybe not, since your posts reveal that you're an intelligent person and that you've been around): there's a lot of bad sex out there for us gay guys too. Most men are just not that good at it; they just want to empty their nutsack, and they have very precise ideas of how they want to do that. We all have to deal with that attitude. But you and I still love sex, don't we? And we still pursue it. So my post really wasn't directed at women like you.

And BTW, I totally agree with your post @ 200.
Posted by Ricardo on February 19, 2011 at 10:32 AM · Report this
shw3nn 205
"If sex is just something that they "give up" in order to attain security, well, am I ever glad I'm gay..."

Now that I've read 201, I would just like to conclude by saying that sex is not just something we "give up" in order to attain security but, CLEARLY, you should still be ever glad you're gay.
Posted by shw3nn on February 19, 2011 at 10:37 AM · Report this
206
@ 201 - "Yeah, Ricardo, we can do it all on our own! Just like you can pop out kids, have a career, and raise and support them all on your own."

I never implied that. I know you can't have it all. That's why you have to make your choices and accept their consequences (as in every other aspect of life, as I've repeated many a times on this forum).

In my not-so-humble opinion, if you want to have kids and to stay at home to raise them, which is thoroughly legitimate, you have to find a man who wants that too, and not "give an ultimatum" (see comment 160 and my answer @ 167) to someone who doesn't, that's all. The same goes for any other arrangement that you might want (DITK, DINK, whatever).

So basically, I totally agree with your penultimate paragraph. Because if we don't follow these rules, as shw3nn points out @ 203, "the potential for swindling is rather high".

And shw3nn @ 203 - No, I'm not missing what's at stake for Martychan, I'm just questioning her attitude in how women should go about to obtain it. Because, as you stated yourself, "this is why you end up with all this mistrust and suspicion and bargaining power".

But I'll go back to what I said @ 186: if there were options other than marriage that provided adequate legal protection to women and children, the whole obsession with getting married would not be so strong, guys wouldn't feel that pressured and would generally be more enthusiastic about having kids (because there wouldn't be a huge legal bill awaiting them in case of separation, on top of child-care payments), and everyone would benefit from it. It works quite well in other countries.

Posted by Ricardo on February 19, 2011 at 11:04 AM · Report this
207
@ 205 - For the record: none of my female friends "give up" sex for security, so that's not my impression of women. Coincidentally, perhaps, none of them are married; they live in countries where they are protected by law no matter what type of relationship they have.

BTW, everyone, "If/then" sentences are, by definition, rhetorical.
Posted by Ricardo on February 19, 2011 at 11:15 AM · Report this
208
EricaP, a lot of your posts make me rather sad. This is a presumptuous thing to say, but I hope that your husband a) appreciates the strength of your commitment and how rare it is to get that from someone like you ie, not a goddamn doormat b) deserves this level and quality of commitment and c) makes it worthwhile to you. Talking about who "deserves" love is mostly a nonstarter, since it's the kind of thing that just happens, but I hope that he deserves it nonetheless.
Posted by chicago girl on February 19, 2011 at 11:18 AM · Report this
209
@ 205 - I forgot: I AM glad I'm gay, but it has absolutely nothing to do with women, or my not wanting kids (which I knew before realizing I was gay).

It has to do with the fact that, once you accept that you're not so-called normal, you're kind of forced to question most of society's other assumptions about what is normal (monogamy & promiscuity, religious beliefs, etc.) and you get to choose only those that suit you. As a consequence, you're a lot more free and a lot more in tune with your own needs than most people. In fact, I pity straights who have to come to terms at one point with not being so-called normal in other ways: since the rest of their life is so normative, it's a lot more of a challenge for them to admit and accept their difference. From what I've seen, at least. And yes, there are gays who don't want to questions those assumptions, who would like to fit the mold, etc. But this is my perception of the general situation.

PS: Please note everyone that I said "so-called normal" and don't start a useless debate about the use of the word "normal" in relation to sexual orientation.
Posted by Ricardo on February 19, 2011 at 11:32 AM · Report this
210
Dear Dan S.



I hope you are having a wonderful day. I am utterly bored at work and thought I'd read the Riverfront Times(St. Louis) to see what people are writing you about. I thought of an idea.



Firstof all, I love reading your column. Sometimes it's the only thing worth reading in this (expletive) paper. However I would love to see what your readers think about people like TYTF, whom wants out of his marriage so he can go fuck whomever...whenever he wants. I would love to hear what his wife thinks about this! We only see his selfish side of the story. There are two parties involved in a butt-fuck. Now that we hear the dick's side, I'd like to hear from the butt.



Is there a way to make this happen Dan? Perhaps the readers should just chime in.



Keep up the good work.



Dan M.

St. Louis
Posted by dirtydan on February 19, 2011 at 11:51 AM · Report this
211
@208 - at first, I felt bad that I am bringing some sadness to your life. But I think the truth is that I really enjoy being able to post honestly about things I can't talk about with my friends. That means I'm not doing the normal level of sugar-coating. Please be reassured that I am happy, joyful even, about my choices in life. And I very much appreciate the opportunity on Slog to write anonymously and openly about difficulties I face, even in the happy, joyful life I have chosen.
Posted by EricaP on February 19, 2011 at 12:04 PM · Report this
212
@202 Erica, I'm confused. Do you mean 45 minutes is too long when he's bad at it or that 45 minutes is always too long?

@208 I would say the same.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 19, 2011 at 12:15 PM · Report this
213
oops! not 208, but 211
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 19, 2011 at 12:16 PM · Report this
214
secretagent,

"text speak is annoying"

Perhaps. I'm experimenting. More exciting in a national column than scribbled in my journal. I found it fun to translate. Text speak may be the language of the future. I want to know if I can keep up with the possible language change. I'll count you as one vote against.
Posted by Hunter78 on February 19, 2011 at 12:45 PM · Report this
215
two votes against text speak. I always assume the writer is a fairly ignorant person since they fail to communicate in English and skip the post, as I don't feel like translating.

And really....there are a LOT of girls out there who like to fuck just for the sake of fucking. Perhaps not up to the %'s of males....but hell, we are out there.

EricaP....45 minutes is too long?????? Hell girl, wanna shot at my hubby? Lol. You would love him. *rolls eyes*
Posted by badgirl on February 19, 2011 at 1:38 PM · Report this
secretagent 216
Ricardo - I was just trying to point out that the "screw 'em, don't need a man, I'm an independent woman!" thing is unrealistic for most women who want families. What sh3wnn said.

And we all have to accept consequences for our choices, including those who choose to get married in response to an ultimatum.

It's totally understandable that a woman would ask a man to make that decision, yes, even in ultimatum form. She IS finding a man who wants what she wants - she's checking if this man is him. If he's not, she leaves. What else is a girl to do? Ask every man she meets "are you planning on marrying me?!" It's not valuing marriage over the relationship. It's valuing family and wanting to know the intentions of the man. Love doesn't make eggs last any longer.

And who said anything about staying home with the kids? I don't want that. I don't know anyone who does, even if it were possible. We're just talking about having kids in general.

Legal protections - that'll be the day. This country is unlikely to ever provide the sort of social services that make that possible in other countries. Americans will never accept the taxes that support such services.

Big picture: college is unnecessary for a lot of people. Making college required to succeed and having parents mostly pay extends teenage-hood into the early 20's. Which means at 25, nobody's quite ready to get married. Which means by 30, it's serious go time. Which means women start freaking out, and men smell the desperation and run the other direction.

Posted by secretagent on February 19, 2011 at 2:00 PM · Report this
217
Wait for times to change or work to change the times. Or try these tips on landing a trophy husband:

http://www.ehow.com/how_4714209_trophy-h…

BTW I'm a househusband.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 19, 2011 at 2:34 PM · Report this
218
@Richardo

I guess I wasn't clear enough in my post. Women both want/enjoy sex AND want security. It's when you see the two desires as somehow opposed that marriage starts looking like a business transaction.

I myself do not withhold sex for security; of course, I get constant messages from both the society and my immediate circles about how that means I'm guaranteeing I'll end up un-married. I post on a love advice forum, and MY GOD, you will not believe how many guys post anxiety-strewn, misogynistic rants about how many guys their girlfriend/fiancee has been with (despite the GUYS having an equal if not greater number.) The more you "give up" sex, the more you subtract guys from your dating pool, as it's still a very common belief that women should be both virginal and sexually adventurous.

You could argue that these men weren't really worth having in your dating pool anyway, but then you're told that you're going to end up alone because you're too picky.

I think a lot of women want to get married partially just to end all the anxiety, shaming and judgment. Hell, I even suspect women get married so they CAN finally enjoy sex. Marriage is meant to erase the shame and fear around being a sexual being, because you finally have a space in which to express your desires without your partner judging you.
Posted by Martychan on February 19, 2011 at 2:43 PM · Report this
shw3nn 219
@206

If a woman is completely honest and upfront about what she wants and who she is, the potential for swindling is only decreased by one half. - the half where she swindles the guy is removed.

The guy is still perfectly capable of saying he's cool with that, dating her indefinitely, enjoying the availability of the free pussy, promising marriage without proposing, then scampering off.

A woman can have the honesty ethics of Kant and still be vulnerable to this swindle.

I don't see where you've presented a solution to this for the women.

If you know of a way that women can remove this risk for themselves without, in any way, raising the stakes for the men by withholding sex or presenting ultimatums, I don't think you've shared it.

You've made it clear that you have a lot of distaste for the fact that these women are engaging in serious risk management. I agree that it is distasteful but I still seems necessary. It's why I'm glad I don't want kids.

Because love was the only thing I wanted, I had the luxury of finding a man I loved and giving him all the love I had to give. I don't think it's about my character or that I'm especially loving or giving. It's a luxury and that is all.
Posted by shw3nn on February 19, 2011 at 2:48 PM · Report this
shw3nn 220
@209

A completely different point I wanted to set aside.

I have definitely noticed the difference you're talking about. Not for nothing and for what it's worth, you speak truth. I see this difference.
Posted by shw3nn on February 19, 2011 at 2:55 PM · Report this
221
@Ricardo: Right on!
Posted by JackDitch on February 19, 2011 at 4:22 PM · Report this
222
@212, 215 - let's see, if it's great sex and I'm getting my orgasms, then, sure, I can go for days. Not finding much of that out there. I like getting stuffed full with cock, but the novelty wears off after 10 or 15 minutes, and then I need something more than just the old "in-out" to keep me interested.

I was responding to Ricardo's reference to guys offering "free dick" in exchange for the "free pussy" I'm offering them. If attractive guys were offering more tongue and fingers, instead of so much free dick, that would be more appealing. Or they could try being more welcoming to my Hitachi. Either way.
Posted by EricaP on February 19, 2011 at 5:20 PM · Report this
223
@222 Oh, that makes sense. You definitely need to mix it up. No loitering. You have a lot of reasonable expectations. From reading SL I would think you would have better luck out there.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 19, 2011 at 5:53 PM · Report this
224
Hey - Too Young to Fail

Not to be disrespectful, but you are simply pathetic. Those people you are considering emotionally abandoning are called your FAMILY. They love you, depend upon you, and probably look up to you.

But your dick is twitchy. Plus, you are hitting 40, and staring into the great void of imminent mortality, and asking yourself "Is this all there is?"

Here is a cautionary tale: My ex felt the same as you - and wanted to experience one last spurt of adolescence. And hey, at one time, we used to hunt chicks together - so monogamy was not the real issue (as it is not with you, TYTF).

So, he lost 30 pounds, dyed his hair, bleached his teeth, and cheated on me with a girl (who looked) nearly young enough to be his grand-daughter. I found out, he announced he wasn't ready to be a father (we had a 6 month old baby).

Flash Forward: He lost his family. He lost his friends. He lost the respect of everyone who had respected him. He regained the weight, plus some - and now lives in the basement of some friends. He pays no child support, as he has no money. He's old, he's lonely, and he's ALONE.

I - on the other hand, live in Europe with a man 14 years my Junior who loves my kid and me passionately. We hunt pussy together now and then, just to keep things interesting.

You are not TYTF - keep on the path, and you will find yourself failing shortly.
Posted by kirikat on February 20, 2011 at 3:06 AM · Report this
225
Hey - Too Young to Fail

Not to be disrespectful, but you are simply pathetic. Those people you are considering emotionally abandoning are called your FAMILY. They love you, depend upon you, and probably look up to you.

But your dick is twitchy. Plus, you are hitting 40, and staring into the great void of imminent mortality, and asking yourself "Is this all there is?"

Here is a cautionary tale: My ex felt the same as you - and wanted to experience one last spurt of adolescence. And hey, at one time, we used to hunt chicks together - so monogamy was not the real issue (as it is not with you, TYTF).

So, he lost 30 pounds, dyed his hair, bleached his teeth, and cheated on me with a girl (who looked) nearly young enough to be his grand-daughter. I found out, he announced he wasn't ready to be a father (we had a 6 month old baby).

Flash Forward: He lost his family. He lost his friends. He lost the respect of everyone who had respected him. He regained the weight, plus some - and now lives in the basement of some friends. He pays no child support, as he has no money. He's old, he's lonely, and he's ALONE.

I - on the other hand, live in Europe with a man 14 years my Junior who loves my kid and me passionately. We hunt pussy together now and then, just to keep things interesting.

You are not TYTF - keep on the path, and you will find yourself failing shortly.
Posted by kirikat on February 20, 2011 at 3:09 AM · Report this
226
I find the whole "she knew I liked to get drunk and have crazy friends before we got married" argument a little hard to take. If you knew that's what you're about, why'd you get married?
Posted by qmars7199 on February 20, 2011 at 3:37 AM · Report this
227
CB,

Dan is right on-- shut the fuck up. Here's another angle you should consider: When you say "this sex is great", that might cause her to wonder "this is good, but could it be better?" You've told her, let it go.
Posted by Hunter78 on February 20, 2011 at 6:04 AM · Report this
228
@ 216 - First, I didn't say that YOU wanted to stay at home with the kids, or should, I used that as an example (indefinite "you"), and also mentioned others at the end of the paragraph. This is a debate about somebody else, I'm speaking rhetorically throughout - I've said that twice already.

I also know it's impossible, or near-impossible to have it all, considering the level of social services in your country (from what you say, I don't really know the details), so their are choices to make. For instance, if you really want a kid and a career, you might have to go freelance for a while and work at home so you can raise the kids. Lose some security, but not your income (just an example, please don't tell me it doesn't apply to you because of the nature of your work blah blah blah, it's rhetorical.)

As for your statement that "Americans will never accept the taxes that support such services", well, that's sad, but the funny thing is that they already do: just reduce the size of your military and stop inventing yourselves enemies to go to war against, there'll be plenty of money left for social programs and a whole lot more. So it's not a question of money, but priorities.

You say "And we all have to accept consequences for our choices, including those who choose to get married in response to an ultimatum". Indeed, But those who accept the ultimatum when they don't actually want to (which is what started this debate, see my post @ 115) are IDIOTS succumbing to social pressure ("She's right, we should get married, everyone tells me I won't find a better one" type of thing). That's not a basis for a solid marriage. And if you (impersonal you) want to get married to such an idiot, well, what does that make you?

If you (personal you) find the ultimatum thing in any way understandable, I'm puzzled. A relationship that needs ultimatums to go forward is one you should have left a long time ago (preaching what I practice here). If a couple follows your advice, "Know what you want, and pursue it from the beginning", either the guy who doesn't want the kids-and-marriage thing will get tired of hearing about it long before the ultimatum comes, or the woman will see telling signs of his lack of interest. AND THEY SHOULD ACT ON IT. As you said yourself, it'll save you a couple of years.

More...
Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 9:10 AM · Report this
229
@ 218 - I'm sad to hear that your society is still that shaming and judgmental.

I thought we'd collectively learned something from feminism.

Looks like that battle needs to be fought all over again.

Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 9:15 AM · Report this
230
@ 219 - There is no solution that I can propose for women, because it's not a women's problem, it's a relationship problem. People in general are immature and lie to get what they want. Men, women, doesn't matter. The best you can do is to be upfront about what you want from the beginning, and then hope that the person you're with is as honest as you are. But as soon as you realize that he/she isn't, LEAVE.

Ultimatums only serve to deepen the lie.

And yeah, that means that some people will not get the happy loving family they wanted. But they won't either if they go about it any other way, they'll just have an unhappy, hate-filled (and often broken) family.

Honesty IS the best policy, but there is no guarantee in life that you'll get what you want. Ever. We all need to keep that in mind. Honesty doesn't guarantee it, neither does manipulation. You just have to do the RIGHT thing and hope for the best, but keep your eyes open for signs of the worst.

PS: My disdain ("distaste" is too weak a word) is not reserved to women who do some "risk management", it is directed equally at all who choose to manipulate those they say they love, including the men you describe who lie about their intentions.
Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 9:35 AM · Report this
231
@ 222 - I only said "free dick" in response to 194, where I was told that guys only wanted free pussy... (I'm pretty sure they also like tits and want BJs.)

Rhetoric, people, rhetoric!!!

Obviously, if a guy only offers dick, and no tongue and fingers, he probably also is just that: a dick. But that's not what we were talking about, is it?

Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 9:47 AM · Report this
secretagent 232
228- I get that you're not referring to me re: stay at home moms - I just didn't see who you *were* referring to. Hypothetical person - gotcha.

It would be really nice if we spent less on military and more on social issues, but then we'd have to stop being so mouthy. Clearly, this is not the American way. But then, I'm still of the mindset that it's shameful to accept handouts. It's a weird mix of self-flagellation, pride and self sufficiency.

But I don't think it's as black and white as all that re: ultimatums. Say, like me, you're in a relationship that's fantastic, but there's no proposal yet. It hasn't been years, but you know where you're going with it, you just don't know where he stands. Men are really good at being completely happy in a relationship but not being "ready yet". So you have a discussion where you basically have to lay it on the line: " I love you, I'm really happy in this relationship, and I would love to marry you. If that's not where you're going with this, I'm going to have to move on. Marriage and a family are important to me." Is this an ultimatum? Kinda. But how else are you to know? Assuming, hoping, waiting is not a smart move. You have to discuss your needs and goals in a relationship, and sometimes you run up against a deal breaker - and that's when people part ways. If he had said, I don't plan on getting married for five more years, I would have been out. I love him, but I also love me.
Posted by secretagent on February 20, 2011 at 9:57 AM · Report this
233
@231 - and if the fingers are for 2 minutes, and the tongue for 5 minutes, and he bitches about the noise my Hitachi makes, and also wants me to stay put while he pumps me for 45 minutes straight, and sulks when I won't put out for anal ... then he's a dick. Yes. But I'm telling Slog, that's what I find, in the NSA crowd. I guess guys put more effort into girls who are "dating" material. For me, with a husband and all, they are just out for what they can get, and show no interest in my pleasure. So I don't see them again. But it's fucking depressing that I can't find good NSA sex out there.
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 10:27 AM · Report this
234
@231 - but, okay, I take your point to be that if a woman has good sex with a guy, sex she loves, then she shouldn't threaten to leave.

If she *does* threaten to leave, clearly the great sex isn't the top priority in her life. Not when she'd have to tell prospective fathers-of-her-children, "Well, I should tell you that I come with some baggage, in the form of my long-time lover who doesn't want kids but does make me swoon with desire." I doubt that conversation goes well.
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 11:43 AM · Report this
235
EricaP,

You're not too fat, are you?
Posted by Hunter78 on February 20, 2011 at 1:35 PM · Report this
236
@233 What about polyamory? Is that not part of your agreement or not something you want? I suppose you would have to wade through a lot of overgrown teenagers in the NSA pool.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 20, 2011 at 2:31 PM · Report this
237
EricaP, thanks for recommending "Passionate Marriage." I'm already enjoying it.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 20, 2011 at 2:33 PM · Report this
238
@Ricardo:
1. Marriages are contracts. They always have been and there's nothing wrong with that. It's sad when they're only contracts, though.
2. As a straight guy, ultimatums aren't bad. She wants me to make up my mind on something important to her promptly? That's just reasonable. Bad is: "Hi honey, guess what? You're a father! Hope you wanted to be, because you're paying the tab either way."

@all: Where can I find some of this "free pussy" people are talking about? All of the women I've ever met expect me to pay at least half the cost of dating (and many if not most describe guys who only pay half the cost of dating as "cheap").

(I don't mean that as a complaint. I'm just observing that what's being called "free pussy" usually isn't.)

And where can I find someone like EricaP? I'm not under any illusions about my non-existent studliness, but I'd like to think I can do better than "don't nag me about anal after I've said no" and "at the very least, don't get in the way of the Hitachi"!

@235: I get the impression Erica is meeting married men who are trying to get from her what their wives won't give them.

Posted by Old Crow on February 20, 2011 at 5:23 PM · Report this
239
@185
Combover, sports car -- innocent. But I do have a cool bicycle.

Grey chest hair -- guilty as charged!

In my fifties -- incredibly guilty! Closer to 60 than 50, in fact.

So why does any of this mean I'm supposed to kind of curl up and die instead of seeking involvement with hot ladies? Perhaps it's because of the assumption that ladies in their 50s are not eager, willing and in fact pretty good at sex.

Posted by Token Straight Old dude on February 20, 2011 at 5:48 PM · Report this
240
@ 238 - In my not so humble opinion, if people wait for their partner to give them ultimatums before they start trying to satisfy the partner's desires and needs, I'd rather not be their partner. I don't think they understand what makes a relationship work. And consequently, if you need to give ultimatums to your partner in order to have your needs satisfied, you should be looking for somebody else instead. Everyone concerned would be happier sooner.

I cannot find one example in my whole life and that of all the people I know where this rule didn't apply.
Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 5:59 PM · Report this
241
@235 lol. Is there a question there? My BMI is about 20, does that answer your question?

@236 - life with two young kids and a husband is already full enough that I don't really want another relationship, just a sexy friend to see a couple of times a month. A lot of guys say they are also looking for a couple of times a month. I think it's just a matter of being patient, to find someone I click with.

@237 - glad you're finding it helpful. It made me realize that my personal insecurities were obstacles for my marriage and I couldn't put off facing them any longer.

@238 - thanks for the friendly remark. For the record, I don't knowingly sleep with married guys unless they're honest with their wives.
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM · Report this
242
@ 232 - Re: your hypothetical situation.

What keeps the woman from proposing, then?

Now, before you answer me with reasons a woman shouldn't propose, think about whether or not those reasons reflect the fairytale view of marriage that I spoke about earlier in this thread. If they do, they're not valid. And that includes "tradition"; this is, as I keep saying, the 21st Century.

Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 6:30 PM · Report this
243
@ 233 - It's depressing for all of us, dear... But the fact is that there aren't that many good lovers out there.
Posted by Ricardo on February 20, 2011 at 6:34 PM · Report this
244
@235 - wait, I see your question- why don't the guys work hard to please me, if I'm offering NSA sex and I'm not fat? My sample size is just 11 guys (and one girl :-), since opening up the marriage. Maybe other women could chime in, if they've found NSA sex to be good or bad. That would help us determine if I'm the problem (too argumentative? too difficult to make come?) or if there's just a lot of bad sex out there.
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 6:35 PM · Report this
245
I don't see how fat is relevant in any way. Any person you have sex with deserves your best effort, which includes lots of continuing education right?
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 20, 2011 at 7:01 PM · Report this
246
@245 I was parsing Hunter78's question about my weight, but I agree that it shouldn't be relevant.

As for lots of continuing education... I wouldn't want to be didactic, but sharing information with an enthusiastic partner is fun :-)
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 7:19 PM · Report this
247
@238 - "what's being called 'free pussy' usually isn't."

TANSTAFP should join TANSTAAFL (there ain't no such thing as a free lunch) among acknowledged truths of the world. With my husband I joke about him having access to conveniently located, already-paid-for pussy.
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 8:38 PM · Report this
248
194: "So when are mature guys gonna retire the whole terror about "being after the wallet" and realize that security is just as natural a want in love as sex is.

When there is an equivalent to alimony that involves pussy instead of money?

Posted by avast2006 on February 20, 2011 at 9:52 PM · Report this
249
@Erica

Thanks - I'm glad my comment read as friendly; it was intended to be but you never know how these things will read over the Internet.

I think the person who suggested polyamory may be on to something. Obviously you don't want a second romantic relationship, but if you're seeing someone on a repeated basis you're by definition in a relationship with them and so you might as well be friends. The risk with that is that the guy decides he wants it to be more than casual, but that risk is inherent as soon as you start considering repeat encounters with the same guy.

I have no idea how casual the casual end of "polyamorous" relationships is (I've never been in a polyamorous relationship myself), but it's probably worth checking out. At the very least, some of the methodology and experience polyamorous people have had is likely to be relevant to your situation.

11 turkeys in a row is a sign the current method is not working. The 12's probably not going to be any better.
Posted by Old Crow on February 20, 2011 at 9:54 PM · Report this
250
TYTF, guess what? It's not your wife's responsibility to make your life interesting, not is it her fault if you don't find it so. You need to find your own fulfillment. And if, at almost 40, it's in drinking and screwing, then YOU my friend, are an immature jerk.

You say you still love your wife? Another news flash - you don't. Not because of anything wrong with her, but probably because you're not capable of it. If you loved her, you wouldn't think of destroying her life and your home just because you want to (*&^ other people. Also you don't love your kids. WHAT? you might say...A mature love would not mess up their home and their lives for something so trivial. You sound like you're not capable of real love for another person. You sound like you're not capable of anything but selfishness.

You want to be a father? Then suck it up, be a man, and continue to create a solid home for them. That's what mature, adult men who love their families do. It's not about you. Deal with it.

Posted by GG1000 on February 20, 2011 at 10:21 PM · Report this
251
@249 - I'm interested in hearing from women on this matter. Women, please share your experiences! Are half of the guys you sleep with good in bed, more than half, or less than half?

(Maybe my standards are too high because I have great sex with my husband. But, recently, some of our best sex is after I come home from having sex with someone else...Fucked up, I know.)
Posted by EricaP on February 20, 2011 at 11:44 PM · Report this
252
Great use of "lesbian" as a verb on the second letter. Can you use it in a positive sense next time.
Posted by first time commenter on February 21, 2011 at 4:52 AM · Report this
253
@251 How is that f'd up? It seems natural that a little fresh perspective and excitement away from your husband would translate into extra enthusiasm when you get home. You are unbelievably lucky to have someone who not only isn't jealous of your outside explorations but who actually gets a charge out of them.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 21, 2011 at 5:34 AM · Report this
secretagent 254
239 - it's not that age means no more hot ladies. It's that ladies half your age will probably not welcome your advances.
242 - I would have no problem proposing marriage. The only reason I wouldn't is if I know the answer already, or know that the man would feel like I stole his moment. Whether I'm traditional or not, I respect men who feel like that's something they want to do. I don't need doors opened for me, but I'm not going to prevent it. And I don't know how you think people should talk about their needs. Telepathy? I'd bring up marriage well before it was marriage time, just so we both know that it's on the table.
244 - crappy sex is partially womens fault. Every woman who hasn't spent time figuring out what pleases her, who doesn't "know how" to communicate her needs, or who doesn't think her needs are important or fakes it is contributing to totally false male ideas about women's sexuality. There are assholes that don't care, but there are many many men who haven't been taught, who don't know if she wants an orgasm, is capable of orgasming, or how to ask. My last boyfriend had not a lot of experience, and was unaware that it was totally unacceptable to just go for it without communicating with me about where I was on the orgasm trail. I agree, lots and lots of sex is technically unskilled. The main problem for me has been getting to the in out too fast, and going too fast once there.
Posted by secretagent on February 21, 2011 at 10:03 AM · Report this
255
@251 - have you considered that the reason you have great sex with your husband is because you know him and have invested years in getting to know him -- and he knows and has invested in YOU -- in countless ways that these one or two date NSA partners cannot?
Posted by just wondering on February 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM · Report this
256
@253 - f'd up because I go have bad sex with strangers so that I can have wild sex at home. My preference would be to skip the NSA sex, but I love the joy and excitement it brings to my marriage, in the retelling. Maybe I just need to improve my story-telling, like Scheherazade.

@254 - agreed, bad sex is everyone's fault, in a culture that discourages women from talking about their needs and discourages men from hearing & understanding them when they do.

@255 - yes, absolutely. But see my reply to 253 for why I'm still out there looking for fun NSA sex.
Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 10:32 AM · Report this
257
@251 It's been my experience that one-night stands or NSA incidents have been pretty lousy. If I don't have some kind of a connection to someone mentally, then the physical just fizzles out. Maybe you should be looking for friends-first and lovers-later, instead of just putting out and expecting fireworks...
Posted by sanguisuga on February 21, 2011 at 10:33 AM · Report this
258
@ 254 - "I don't know how you think people should talk about their needs. Telepathy? I'd bring up marriage well before it was marriage time, just so we both know that it's on the table"

That's how I imagine it. Just like you said. You talk about what you want and how you want it from the beginning. Then you monitor your partner's reactions: Does he give you vague, noncommittal answers? Does he always look down or away when marriage (or any other subject that matters to you) is broached? Does he try to change or avoid the subject? If so, he's not interested, and you know what to do.

Do not ever take non-commitment as a sign of possible change and future commitment. It isn't. As Dan pointed out recently, when you're getting mixed signals, just take the negative ones, the rest is sugarcoating.

At any rate, there should never be a need for an ultimatum, because the response you'll get with an ultimatum is rarely going to be honest. "Oops, I think I fucked it up, better try and save whatever I can of this relationship before it's too late, later I'll think about what to do next" is the more likely reaction... not that your partner would say that out loud to you, but that's still what he would probably think when his back is put against the wall.

Is that a good basis for a relationship? No.

It all comes down to what you said already: "Know what you want, and pursue it from the beginning. Quit dating people you KNOW you're not going to marry. Men, don't hang around out of obligation, or fear of change, or whatever chicken-shit reason you stay with women who aren't the One or whatever. Women, stop expecting him to change (he won't), don't stay with a man who isn't what you need for fear of being alone, talk about your plans in concrete, reality based ways (no "someday") and if he runs, he wasn't the guy and he just saved you another 2 years"

So... why are you and I debating? We totally agree on this.
More...
Posted by Ricardo on February 21, 2011 at 11:06 AM · Report this
259
@251 - i've got a fairly small sample size, but i'd say about half of men are good in bed. what's interesting is that the ones who THINK they are amazing in bed are the ones who just want to mechanically move in and out for an hour. they really do believe you'll love it. it's the ones who are less cocky (no pun intended) who are able to really be present that end up with skills...
Posted by Vultur on February 21, 2011 at 1:09 PM · Report this
secretagent 260
258 - We do agree! Just not on everything. For you, ultimatums are anathema. For me, they are sometimes necessary wake-ups. I think saying "If this isn't headed towards marriage, I'm out" is pretty ultimatum-ish. But it's also part of a conversation about where the relationship is headed that needs to happen.

Also, the idea of regularly talking about marriage with a guy you haven't already spent at least a year on is just silly. Say "marriage" to a guy in the first 6 months or even a year and he'll look at you like you've got 2 heads. You can "not right now" and "I'm not ready either" until you're blue in the face. You still just nearly made him wet himself.

I don't think all men think about where a relationship is headed in a concrete way. Not until something prompts them. Many are content to float along in happy land until some magic bell strikes (or doesn't strike) and then they get serious. The problem is, this magic bell seems to strike later and later. For women, it seems to be much more of a priority going in - is this guy marriage potential? For men, it's more like "am I ready now?" Why bother thinking about whether you want to marry her since you're not ready to marry? We go about it in totally opposite ways. Thus, a semi-ultimatum is born.
Posted by secretagent on February 21, 2011 at 4:12 PM · Report this
261
@ 30 -
I've included your reply to #28 and I must ask: what colour IS the sky in your world? Geesh. Sometimes, one does have to wonder if these people just materialise after someone moves a rock.

"@28 - Women have largely (not completely) controlled sex and reproduction, which is an ENORMOUS source of power. Patriarchy is part of a counterbalance to that power. The Women's Movement, as much as I support it, creates imbalance in marital relationships by giving women more power in society and within marriage, without any counterbalance to the sexual-reproductive power women already hold."

Sweetheart, you can have ALL the "reproductive power" you want and I'LL take the money, the more respect at work, the assumption that "my word" is more intelligent simply because "I'M A MAN!"

What EXACTLY is "reproductive power?" Do you mean the power of ending up on the bread line because of so-called "looking after the family" type political systems deeming "single mothers" as being the scurge of the earth and therefore must be treated as the lowest of the low?
Tsk, tsk... you poor baby. What's that? You can't just go and fuck some chick and leave her knocked up with all that "power" because, oh, horror of horrors, she wants to have "rights?" Upset, are you that there are legal ramifications towards husbands who rape their wives?
Oh, wait, I forgot about the "reproductive power."
What exactly are you driving at? What would be YOUR perfect marriage?
If women have SO much "power" then of course, like you - because surely, you'd expect the same for yourself if YOU had such "power" - they should WANT to be told when and where they can go and with whom they can speak and be ready, willing and able to drop skirt at the man's beck and call and do ALL the child rearing and ALL the housework because we all know they wouldn't be working but would live as prisoners in their own homes. I'm certain YOU'D like that trade off if YOU had the "reproductive power."

What is this, moron day on the Savage thread?
Geesh.
Consider yourself lucky that you don't live in such times.
As for #11, honey, at least I'm not ruled by my hormones. Women may "periodically" become irrational but men are like that ALL THE TIME. Gotta love testosterone. Before anyone fires off a strongly worded message, just go look up the effects of testosterone in the human body and then go look up PMS. Sound familiar.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha...
Gloria Steinem said it best but what I don't get is why are men so scared of women in the first place... Oh, wait. It must be all that "reproductive power" we have. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha....

Oh, and PS, er, women aren't just empty wombs walking around waiting to squeeze out babies! How would YOU like it if women had ALL the power and told you that YOU don't have a mind that can be affected by words such as what you've written above? Is it really logical to assume that women are just gagging to exercise their "reproductive power" and have NO thoughts beyond that?
Ok, who moved that rock?!
More...
Posted by Frederica Bimble on February 21, 2011 at 4:52 PM · Report this
262
@ 36 - Oh, you said it better than me! I should have read your post before I rambled.
Posted by Frederica Bimble on February 21, 2011 at 5:05 PM · Report this
263
@260, I agree that men often don't think about starting a family without a push. But there are subtle pushes... Attending weddings & showers together. Pointing out cute babies, talking about other guys you know...
Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 5:19 PM · Report this
264
@ 120 - typical troll. Professor of Sociology, eh? How convenient! Yet, with ALL that education, you STILL behave like a 17 - 22 year old boy who "gets off" on being childish.
Nothing new, then.
You DO realise "sociology" IS a "Mickey Mouse" degree. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha...
Sweetheart, it doesn't matter if you're "the Professor of the World" you still have A LOT of growing up to do if you're going to relate to other human beings.
It's easy to be a smart-arse behind a screen and to make up all sorts of deluded notions of professorship but you really let yourself down by your lack of eloquence.
Professor of whatever, you still HATE WOMEN and no amount of teenage boy "arguing with mummy" will change that.
Now, go play in the street.
Posted by Frederica Bimble on February 21, 2011 at 5:20 PM · Report this
265
Or...@TYTF....you just tough it out. Every hetero, average, horny, regular dude sees 100 women per day he wants to bang. I'm sorry, you are not special in this regard.

And those guys, you know what...They don't do it. Why? Because boredom in a marriage is normal and inevitable. People that are successful in relationships find a way to make their relationships interesting and fulfilling. They don't cheat and they don't bail. They figure it out. They communicate, experiment, fail, and try again, all the while working towards that evolving, winning combination known as monogamy.

So, this is really not about you being bored. It is about you making a bad decision in getting married in the first place. It is about your willingness stop being a lazy douche and do your work.
Posted by Ickray on February 21, 2011 at 5:27 PM · Report this
266
EricaP,

You caught the reason behind my fatness question. You and Jenesasquatch can say it shouldn't matter, and maybe it shouldn't, but in fact, it does.

Fatness was an attempt to find a easy explanation for a complex situation. As an intelligent woman seeking NSA, one does wonder why you aren't finding more fun. Perhaps it's that bundle of insecurities. As for all those guys wanting anal with you, I think they were just trying to get more intimate. Don't let it flip you out.
Posted by Hunter78 on February 21, 2011 at 5:30 PM · Report this
267
Or...@TYTF....you just tough it out. Every hetero, average, horny, regular dude sees 100 women per day he wants to bang. I'm sorry, you are not special in this regard.

And those guys, you know what...They don't do it. Why? Because boredom in a marriage is normal and inevitable. People that are successful in relationships find a way to make their relationships interesting and fulfilling. They don't cheat and they don't bail. They figure it out. They communicate, experiment, fail, and try again, all the while working towards that evolving, winning combination known as monogamy.

So, this is really not about you being bored. It is about you making a bad decision in getting married in the first place. It is about your willingness stop being a lazy douche and do your work.
Posted by Ickray on February 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM · Report this
268
@266 - funny thing about anal, I'm actually open to the idea, I just insist on the basics: lots of time getting me ready (esp. with a new partner), lots of lube, more time, more lube... The NSA guys don't like that. It makes them nervous that they won't stay hard that whole time. They say, "why don't you get yourself ready"? Two guys stuck in in, without lube, after I'd been very clear that wasn't okay.

It's not intimacy, Hunter78. They just want a tight hole. The tenser I am, the hotter it is to them. Fuckers.
Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 5:55 PM · Report this
269
@266 My point is that by the time you make it to bed with someone fat is irrelevant. You owe that person respect.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 21, 2011 at 6:34 PM · Report this
270
@ 260 - If you come up with the word marriage on the second date, I'd say you're lesbianing the relationship (you know, the joke about the u-haul truck).

What you can do as early as the first date (depending on the type of first date, obviously) is slip into the conversation that you're ultimately looking for a serious relationship, and you can mention that you want children. I did say "slip into" and "mention", ok? Not talk about it for an hour. Not say that your life won't be complete without marriage and children. Just mention it.

If he balks then, gee, how much time and effort have you just saved yourself?

In my experience, there are two types of straight guys: those who want a family (the majority, yes) and those who don't. They're not as obvious about it as women, generally, but if you see the guy grow uncomfortable at the mere mention of these subjects, he's part of the latter group. It's easy!

If a woman thinks that ultimatums are sometimes necessary, it's because she's not very good at reading cues, or she's good at it but she keeps hoping that her guy will change (in violation of your rule...). No other guy in the world ever has, but of course, hers will. Because she's so special.

Ladies, I have some news for you: rocks are more prone to change than men. What a guy wants the first day is the same as what he'll want after ten years (remember TYTF?). But what no guy wants is to imagine his life turn into a set of responsibilities. That's the waters you have to navigate.

Every man is still an adolescent inside, so if you shove the word "commitment" in his face at every turn, he'll go running the other way. (Careful: if a man talks about commitment, he's really thinking about the woman's). If getting married seems like an obligation, forget it. If having kids is a duty, he won't want to. Unless he's succumbing to societal pressure, that is, but then he'll blame the woman who "did that to him" for everything that's wrong about his life ten years later (remember TYTF?).

Men who want kids actually want to literally re-produce themselves, to have a "mini-me"; basically, a toy in their image. "Fun" is the key word, not "obligation".

The same goes for the relationship. If he thinks he'll have fun with you for a long time, he'll be willing to go a long way; if you make him feel that you're on a tight schedule to achieve your family-oriented goals and that he looks like the set of genes you'd like to do that with... good luck.

(OK, I exagerated a bit here to get my point across, I admit it.)
More...
Posted by Ricardo on February 21, 2011 at 6:38 PM · Report this
271
@268 You really need to catch before you're permitted to pitch.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 21, 2011 at 6:41 PM · Report this
272
@268 Also, you're earlier call for quality time spent with fingers, tongue, and Hitachi equally apply to anal.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 21, 2011 at 7:02 PM · Report this
273
Your
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 21, 2011 at 7:04 PM · Report this
274
@ 268 - I still get that after 20 years. Now it's the fear of not staying hard, before, well, they always had some other excuse.

Men are children. Big spoiled brats. They want their toy and they want it now.
Posted by Ricardo on February 21, 2011 at 7:07 PM · Report this
275
@269 Hunter78 is a jerk. He has admitted that he wants to figure out what's wrong with me, because it's hardly possible that I could have encountered 11 selfish guys in a row. Yet I don't see any women posting here about all the hot NSA sex they've been having, to undermine my results.

How about you gay guys? When you have NSA sex, how often is the other guy too selfish to help you get off? 25% of the time? 50% of the time? more? (I know you yourselves are all sweeties and the epitomes of generosity :-)

@271 - in an ideal world, yeah.

Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 7:11 PM · Report this
276
@274 - yep. Especially if you take accountability off the table with NSA sex (I'm not girlfriend material; I can't rat them out to their real friends).
Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 7:14 PM · Report this
277
@275 Ideal? Bring your own dick along and demand he self-demonstrate his technique. It's called an entrance exam.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM · Report this
278
"Only 1 time out of 100 is non-monogamy going to be what the wife is looking for, too. "

I guess this person never met any swingers. HaHa!

I think he should talk to his wife about a need for adventure and doing fun stuff again, date nights etc. And then I think they should work their way into a little swinging. A sexual adventure they could enjoy TOGETHER. It is not cheating if you are doing it together. Many if not most swingers are "same room only". Maybe if he saw how much someone else wanted his wife it would make him appreciate her more. Plus variety for both of them. Assuming she has a wild side that she has suppressed as of late- she might love it if they are able to communicate about it.

Just a thought. He obviously loves her if he still wants "to take care of her." Maybe they can find a "win-win"
Posted by yummy on February 21, 2011 at 7:33 PM · Report this
secretagent 279
Yeah, Ricardo, I know enough about men not to scare them off. I'm just saying a LOT of them get itchy when marriage/kids come up, even the most loving, committed ones. It's still a scary big deal. See "cold feet", see every person getting married ever, see the razzing, last chance bachelor parties, and generally freaked-out-edness of most men re: marriage. I think you're making a molehill out of a mountain. You can be as awesome as anything, and it doesn't make getting married any less scary. Especially if you ARE the right kind of man - because the right kind of man doesn't run the fuck off like TYTF, who seems to think the world is a merry-go-round of gratification. And yes, there are definitely signs he DOESN'T want to get serious. There are a lot less signs he does. He can be happy as a pig in a pile and still have this idea that he's not getting married til X, or he needs to do Y first, or whatever. You don't intuit that crap.

Unfortunately, EricaP, men get off a lot easier than we do. So I imagine the "success" rate of a penis-penis encounter would be higher than a penis-vagina encounter. As a veteran of NSA world, I'd say 1 in 10 is good. I posit that you have to hold out in NSA land. As in, I'm not going to fuck you on the first date - that's for determining if I like you and can tolerate your company for this purpose. If I do, then you get a second meeting, but you still need to hang out a minute first. You've gotta be a person to him or he's not going to care about your pleasure. And if it's not good, stop and leave. He doesn't get to get off if he doesn't make a damned good effort to get you off. FWB land is kinder to women than NSA land. In NSA land, you're pretty much looked at as a free hooker. And we all know men treat them soooo well.
Posted by secretagent on February 21, 2011 at 7:35 PM · Report this
280
@279 - "a free hooker" - ding ding ding! That's what it feels like.

My new gameplan (and thanks for helping me think about this, Slogsters), is to develop a social circle of sex positive people, whether poly or BDSM, so that there will be accountability, and they know they'll be seeing me again. Oh, and so we can become friends first.

Hopefully I'll be able to send more cheerful reports from the field!
Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 8:17 PM · Report this
281
@ 279 - I was still in a rhetorical mood; it's obvious that you, personally, know a thing or two about men.

Posted by Ricardo on February 21, 2011 at 8:23 PM · Report this
282
@EricaP

I have been in open relationship for 25 years. I was in my 30's, and like a kid in a candy shop, during the first 4+ years. I had some strong connections with a few men and women, who I spent time with sporadically.( I was traveling a lot in those years.) I also had sex with strangers. I could have skipped 75% of those encounters with men.

The sweet man I lived with wanted children. I didn't and we always knew we weren't going to stay together forever.

Now I'm 21 years into another open relationship. When we got together,sexual safety issues were up in a way they had not been before. I decided condoms slip and condoms break and sex with strangers wasn't worth the risk.

I still like being able to follow through on a strong attraction. If there isn't a really big pull, it's almost always not enough fun to bother with. I still occasionally connect with someone I've just met, who I have potent chemistry with. I have been very fortunate that my choices have been good, and most of those partners became friends, who I care for and have ongoing relationships with - whether we're being lovers or not.

I don't connect as often as I used to,and when I do connect,it's potent. Much better for me.

Would you and your partner be as excited if you made up stories about encounters? Sex you don't enjoy seems like a bad idea. Wonder how it was with the one woman. I know, from experience, it's hard to hook up with women if you're in a primary relationship with a man, and if you liked it, you might want to put more attention toward hooking up with women. Also wonder if you and your partner want the sex to be good with others, or if part of the excitement is that other men disappoint you and he makes you happy.

Be careful woman! NO means NO. Most women I know, call penetration without permission rape.

best

More...
Posted by mylita on February 21, 2011 at 8:34 PM · Report this
283
@EricaP

Just read #280. hurray for you and your new plan!
Posted by mylita on February 21, 2011 at 9:05 PM · Report this
284
I am astounded that it took 278 comments to get to swinging (granted, I skimmed after the first hundred or so). I know a lot of couples that have revived their sex life this way, and you would be shocked to find that who you assumed would never indulge, become the most enthusiastic (as in your wife, TYTF). Best of all, there is NO deceit involved! #278 is spot-on.
Posted by Lynda A. on February 21, 2011 at 9:53 PM · Report this
285
The other GOP hopefuls just got santorumed:
http://www.awkwardsnail.com/2011/02/gops…
Posted by rory on February 21, 2011 at 11:00 PM · Report this
286
mylita @282, yeah, good points, all.
Posted by EricaP on February 21, 2011 at 11:58 PM · Report this
287
I thought this was a pretty bland week for SL, but the comments more than made up for it.

EricaP: yeah, those guys you've been with are losers. NSA doesn't need to be "No Standards Apply" - finding other sex positive people is definitely the way to go (although it may not be easy, depending on where you are). Guys who want anal with a woman they just met are not very sex positive, they're just greedy assholes. Sex for its own sake, with no obligations, is a gift. Save it for people who deserve it.

jenesasquatch: I'm glad you clarified. It's true, sometimes a degree of sexual dissatisfaction isn't enough cause to end an otherwise good relationship - we can't have everything we want. But if it's strong enough, it's a perfectly good reason. Dan's right, sexual compatibility needs to be very high on the list of requirements for a happy, lasting relationship. Too many people overlook it or regard it as selfish or crass.

And yeah, maybe you were oversimplifying or being glib, but AFAIC a partner who isn't interested in your sexual satisfaction is a partner who isn't interested in you.

Ricardo: You rock. That is all.
Posted by Chase on February 22, 2011 at 12:53 AM · Report this
288
Nope! Your wife will not surprise you and pleasantly give you permission to screw around on her, TYTF. You wife will scream, cry & then divorce you. You will then find, in a yr or so that you hurt your kids and gave up your entire marriage because you had a mid-life crisis. Mr. Savage is right on two points- 1. The Barista & co. have no interest in screwing you. 2. You DO need to talk to your wife. But instead of asking her to sit home with the kids while you ATTEMPT to indulge your fantasies with pretty young girls...tell her you feel that you're in a rut & it's effecting your marriage & see if you can't start some couples counseling.
Posted by Sammyrose on February 22, 2011 at 6:05 AM · Report this
289
Nope! You're wife will not surprise you, TYTF. She will yell, cry and most likely divorce you. And then you will find in a yr or two that you have hurt your kids and given up your entire marriage because you experienced a mid-life crisis.

Mr. Savage is right on two points however: 1. The Barista & co does not want to screw you. 2. You do need to talk to your wife of 10 yrs. But instead of asking her to sit home with the kiddie while you're out trying to make it with young (creeped-out) girls, tell her you feel that you're in a rut & it's starting to affect your marriage. Then see if you guys can't enter into some marriage counseling.

To the LW with the "straight" friend- have you ever considered that he IS into guys but denying it may be his convoluted way of saying that he's just not into YOU?
Posted by Sammyrose on February 22, 2011 at 6:27 AM · Report this
290
Sorry for the double post- don't know what's going on with the computer this am....
Posted by Sammyrose on February 22, 2011 at 6:28 AM · Report this
291
@280. It sounds like you put yourself in some potentially dangerous situations (I agree with the rape definition @282) so the great sex you already have with your husband can be even hotter. Is it really worth it? This doesn't sound joyful (as you have described it) to me. I am worried for you.
Posted by just wondering on February 22, 2011 at 7:11 AM · Report this
292
@290 Don't sweat it. Version 2.0 was better. I often wish I could edit my comments after posting.
Posted by jenesasquatch on February 22, 2011 at 7:53 AM · Report this
293
About the NSA sex with strangers: I have had my fair share; hey, I had to audition for my lover before I found him, lol! and to answer EricaP's question about men being good in bed and NSA vs FWB:

I think overall, most men *try*. The difference for *me* in NSA vs. FWB is that as I get older, the emotional aspect of sex gets more and more important. When I was younger, I had many more body issues (thanks in part to douchebags like Hunter! :D ), so there was something actually liberating about NSA....I wanted to get off, he wanted to get off, let's just...do whatever it takes to get each other off, and throw inhibitions to the wind. Thank you, don't forget your coat on the way out. I do think these guys cared about getting me off, but more to feed their ego, rather then because they really wanted me to feel pleasure. Does that make them bad people? No, it was mutual use, and ok because we were all coming at it from the same, understood place. Some were more accomplished lovers then others for sure; I would say the skill rate being 50:50 decent to crappy? Some of the crappiest ones were downright inconsiderate, but I always got out of there as soon as possible after discovering this.

These days, NSA has little appeal to me. Give me FWB...probably because I have been really, and I mean *REALLY* introduced to chemistry for the first time with my FWB. We do have an emotional connection, and we know each others likes and dislikes. If something happened and we could no longer be together, I would want to find another situation like this, a long term FWD, someone I do get to know and have *chemistry* with. Do I feel that his talents are any more truly advanced then any other guy? Probably not...I mean, he is definitely on the truly talented end of the spectrum, but us together is dynamite. This is because he knows what I like, and he genuinely loves to bring me pleasure, not only to feed his ego, but he really cares about me and likes to make me feel good. Much different then when I was fucking just to get off when I was younger before I met him, or even when we first started out even. We have evolved, and its gotten a lot more intense and I like it. Would beuing in a "real" relationship rob of us this chemistry? I dunno....never had the opportunity to find out.

And to Hunter. Fuck you. A fat girl doesn't have the right to be respected in bed by her partner? If you aren't attracted to someone, don't take them to bed. Fuck you to suggests it ok to take a big girl to bed and mistreat her because she's not a size 6. I am 6' and wear size 12 jeans, and run 5K and do yoga, and can do some *amazing*, tantric like things with my body. I try to weed sizest assholes like you out; being not attracted to bigger girls is ok by me, plenty of men think I am hot....lying to a woman, telling her you find her sexy, taking her to bed, and then treating her like a second class citizen, unworthy of your respect....well, you are the fucking loser because you can't score someone you are really attracted to now, aren't you?
More...
Posted by badgirl on February 22, 2011 at 9:29 AM · Report this
294
@291, thanks for your concern; I don't think I'm in danger of meeting a psychopath, or at least, he'd be easy for my husband to track down. I stay anonymous until the first meeting, but insist that the guys tell me their name & where they work, and I check that out online, and they know I have given my husband the details. At any rate, I think I understand the risks. But see 280 for the new plan to try to get to know guys as friends first before having sex.
Posted by EricaP on February 22, 2011 at 9:52 AM · Report this
295
EricaP- I'll weigh in on how common it is to find really selfish men in NSA/FWB. 1 good or decent lover in a dozen is about right, I think. Unfortunately, I'm 100% single, so I don't have a good lover to get my ya yas out in between. It's really fucking depressing.
Posted by S-Lo on February 22, 2011 at 2:43 PM · Report this
296
My Grandparents died a few years ago, after 70 years of marriage.

Oddly, I don't recall a single whiny 'it's so BORING' from my Grandpa. I don't recall a single moan about housework and child-rearing from Grandma. They had these feelings, undoubtedly. What they did differently from most of the liberal weirdos and perverts here is this- they stuck it out. They kept the oaths they made to each other and they damn well stuck it out. Watching them age in the measureless comfort of 7 decades of intimacy was one of the most inspiring things I've ever witnessed. If in 50 years by loving and honoring my wife I have given this same wonderful example to my grandchildren I'll consider myself a very lucky man indeed.

Granted, this is something an emotional child like Savage and his ilk can never understand. It isn't instant gratification, after all, but a long term comittment to the well being of your opposite sex spouse. People like Savage are like my dog. They can't remember for more than a few seconds the connection of their actions to any given outcome.

Here's the secret, Savage. Happiness is not the goal. It is a by-product. Meet your obligations cheerfully to your family and friends (or fake the cheer when you must), give your boss or customers an honest days work at something for which you have real talent, find healthy and moral ways to express your personality in whatever amuses you, and you'll be happy. Otherwise you're just some schmuck forever chasing the pot of gold at rainbows' end.

Monogamy works. For adults. It just doesn't work for perpetual adolescents who refuse to accept that marriage really does mean 'for better or for worse.' The kind of man who cheats on his wife is the kind of man who cheats in business or anywhere else. It's a mark of character. Without it, a man is a hollow shell of no value.
More...
Posted by Grow up already! on February 22, 2011 at 2:44 PM · Report this
e. ebullient 297
@296 Ethical non-monogamy *can be* a "healthy and moral way to express your personality". It can also be a key part of being able to make a long-term committment to the well-being of your spouse (opposite sex or otherwise).

You're the one that needs to grow up. Only children and "perpetual adolescents" assume that their answers are the right answers for everyone.
Posted by e. ebullient on February 22, 2011 at 3:57 PM · Report this
298
Odd. My vows said 'forsaking all others.' Difficult to be ethical and moral and break your promises at the same time. Betraying my wife sexually can NEVER be a key part of anything but the dimunition of our marriage.

Marriage is, always has been and always will be the union of a man and a woman. What Savage has with his boyfriend may be based on love, however perverted. It may be lasting. It may be a lot of things. What it is not and never will be is a marriage.

'My answers' are the product of thousands of years of social evidence across time and culture. They are the consensus reached by such different cultures as the Saudis, the Chinese, and those right here in America. Can you say the same about notions like polyandry?
Posted by Grow up already! on February 22, 2011 at 4:35 PM · Report this
299
@298 My vows didn't say forsaking all others. "Love, honor, and cherish, in sickness and in health, for better and for worse, so long as we both shall live." 15 years later, so far, so good.
Posted by EricaP on February 22, 2011 at 4:56 PM · Report this
e. ebullient 300
@299, exactly. I love how this troll just assumes he know everything about everyone's wedding vows.

@298, sounds like YOU are shit out of luck, then, when it comes to ethical nonmonogamy. But which part of your vows compel you to harass others for enjoying things you can't?

Also, polyamory is the word you're looking for. Polyandry means multiple husbands, which is not the case for the original LW.

But you're right, it works well enough for the majority of people, the majority of the time (shit, just don't look too hard at all the cheating going on in those "thousands of years of social evidence", or at America's current divorce rate). So you're essentially arguing that whatever works for the majority should be forced on any minority for which it doesn't. Care to entertain a few thoughts about where that philosophy might lead you? I would do it myself, but I tire of feeding the trolls.
Posted by e. ebullient on February 22, 2011 at 6:54 PM · Report this
301
Regarding "Safety Valve" from "Too Young to Fail," I agree with you totally that TYTF could find himself right back in a state of sexual boredom all over again. At the same time I think that acting out sexually could be an outcome of a transformational state that is necessary and unavoidable for TYTF. 

My own first marriage broke up over sexual boredom and falling in love with a sexually compelling new girlfriend. In the long run, actually, it was about me changing careers. Two years after the breakup, I transitioned from an discouraging and unpromising academic career in the arts to a professional software developer. 

How were the two connected?  Sex in early adulthood is very much about growth, transformation, getting-from-here-to-there. It's about breaking away from our families and transcending the restrictions of our family backgrounds; even the Bible says this. It's the ultimate upward mobility and eye-opener to new possibilities. 

Whatever transformation TYTF needs, returning to that process of liberating sexual discovery feels like the ticket to get there.  It may be a strange way to go about things, but who can really say we understand the mysteries of sex and libido?

Greg
Posted by Fishtaco1 on February 23, 2011 at 6:58 AM · Report this
302
Regarding "Safety Valve" from "Too Young to Fail" (2/17/2011), I agree with you totally that TYTF could find himself right back in a state of sexual boredom all over again. At the same time I think that acting out sexually could be an outcome of a transformational state that is necessary and unavoidable for TYTF.

My own first marriage broke up over sexual boredom and falling in love with a sexually compelling new girlfriend. In the long run, actually, it was about me changing careers. Two years after the breakup, I transitioned from an discouraging and unpromising academic career in the arts to a professional software developer.

How were the two connected? Sex in early adulthood is very much about growth, transformation, getting-from-here-to-there. It's about breaking away from our families and transcending the restrictions of our family backgrounds; even the Bible says this. It's the ultimate upward mobility and eye-opener to new possibilities.

Whatever transformation TYTF needs, returning to that process of liberating sexual discovery feels like the ticket to get there. It may be a strange way to go about things, but who can really say we understand the mysteries of sex and libido?

Greg
Posted by fishtaco on February 23, 2011 at 8:13 AM · Report this
303
EricaP: my NSA sexual experiences can be divided into two parts: part 1 from before I was married and part 2 that happened between my divorce and meeting my current bf.

The guys of part 1 seemed selfish and "bad in bed" to me. The guys of part 2 seemed mostly pretty good (sometimes even great). There are reasons for this:

1) I ask for what I want now; I didn't when I was younger. Seems like most guys do want to please a woman, they just don't know how and they're so desperate to look all cool and experienced that they don't want to ask for directions. Give directions and they will largely be followed.

2) When I was younger I was with typical, unenlightened guys who think of sex as a transaction - as something you have to con a woman into "giving up". The guys I was seeing over the past few years, by contrast, were largely open-minded poly types who think of sex as a fun shared experience. This attitude makes the bedroom stuff way better. It also means the guy is more likely to be up for an ongoing arrangment: that first sex that the two of you shared was a fun activity they'd like to experience with you again, not a sullying thing that rendered you valueless.

Oh and btw the dudes from both sample groups ranged from 19-27 - so age is not a factor in my calculations.
Posted by perversecowgirl on February 23, 2011 at 2:44 PM · Report this
304
Oh, and also, for the purposes of this discussion, I'm defining "good in bed" as "he did stuff to please me and didn't just focus on himself".

Any other definition would be unfair since I think most really mindblowing sex comes from happy anatomical coincidences rather than skill - in other words I'm not gonna label an attentive, sweet, intuitive boy as "bad in bed" just because his wrist gives out under stress or his tongue is shorter than I'd like. :D
Posted by perversecowgirl on February 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM · Report this
305
perversecowgirl @303/304 - Do you see a difference between guys with whom you shared a social circle (poly or otherwise), and guys you only met for sex? My current hypothesis is that guys try harder when they really know you and you have mutual friends -- but my theory is not based on much evidence. I'm planning on testing it out this year, but I was wondering if it rang true to you.
Posted by EricaP on February 23, 2011 at 3:48 PM · Report this
306
EricaP: Do you see a difference between guys with whom you shared a social circle (poly or otherwise), and guys you only met for sex?

I have no good answer for this - I actually met all my partners of the past 5 years (including my bf) over the internet, so although many of them were poly I wasn't part of their "community" per se.

However, my online personal ads have always said either that I was looking for a FWB (emphasis on friend) or that I had no specific agenda and wanted to just meet people and see where it went. If you're specifically putting yourself out there as looking for anonymous/casual sex, I would imagine that would tend to attract some pretty gross people...or rather, it'd attract all kinds of different people but you've had back luck with the particular ones you've met, whereas my approach tends to filter the gross guys out.

But I don't know how you're presenting yourself, so this is all just speculation.
Posted by perversecowgirl on February 23, 2011 at 5:10 PM · Report this
307
*bad luck. Not back. Sigh.
Posted by perversecowgirl on February 23, 2011 at 5:11 PM · Report this
308
"Try to resist the urge to lesbian this thing into the ground by communicating it to death."

This is brilliant! Can I put it on a t-shirt? Just one, for personal use?
Posted by Benny Pendentes on February 24, 2011 at 2:38 AM · Report this
309
for AHA, There is always the chance that your straight friend is a bottom and feels you are also a bottom, and therefor incompatible.
who knows.
Go meet some openly gay men.
Posted by noahbodyx on February 24, 2011 at 8:14 AM · Report this
310
for AHA, There is always the chance that your straight friend is a bottom and feels you are also a bottom, and therefor incompatible.
who knows.
Go meet some openly gay men.
Posted by noahbodyx on February 24, 2011 at 8:17 AM · Report this
311
EricaP: I don't know about other guys, but I like intercourse for 45 minutes because I prefer 45 minutes of pleasure to 15 minutes of pleasure! The better the girl is in bed, or the more attractive she is, the longer I'd want it to go...

From your earlier post it sounds like you need an "intermission" of fingers or tongue after 10 or 15 minutes of intercourse or it doesn't work for you: do you make this clear to guys? Do you tell them you need to stop and they need to eat you for a while and then they can continue? Either there are a lot of guys who are bad in bed or you're just not being clear enough about what you need.

I'm not sure there will be a big difference if you torture yourself by making yourself wait longer for sex while you build up a friendship: if he's bad in bed or doesn't listen, that probably won't change much.
Posted by BlackRose on February 24, 2011 at 9:34 AM · Report this
312
I'm not sure there will be a big difference if you torture yourself by making yourself wait longer for sex while you build up a friendship: if he's bad in bed or doesn't listen, that probably won't change much.


This makes no sense to me. 1) while you're getting to know the guy, you'll be able to suss out whether or not he's a good listener and 2) a guy who wants to get to know you before sex is a guy who sees you as a person and not a hole.

I'm not sure whether that part of your comment was aimed at what I'd said about putting an ad for "friends with benefits" rather than just casual sex, BlackRose, but for the record, when I say I want to be friends with someone I fuck, I mean I want to go out for coffee for an hour or two to make sure the guy puts me at ease and doesn't seem like a serial killer. If we seem to click during coffee, I'll take him home.

When I was first divorced, I made the mistake of saying I was up for casual sex. Men would literally message me going "Hi, you sound hot! Come over now" and if I said I wanted to talk a while first, they got pissed off (at having to "work for it" I guess...) and said to forget the whole thing.

So, yeah. A lot of guys seem to believe there's a magical pussy delivery service that will bring some random horny chick right to their door, no questions asked...and they'd hit up 100 girls for InstantPussy and fail than spend two fucking hours getting to know me over coffee so I feel comfortable being alone and naked with them. Hence my stipulation of FWB. Weeds out the assholes.
Posted by perversecowgirl on February 24, 2011 at 2:19 PM · Report this
313
@312: Oh, of course, getting coffee for a couple hours is a good idea, and it's what I usually do. My comment wasn't aimed at what you said: what I meant was that if you already know you want to have sex with someone, I don't think making yourself wait months will necessarily make the sex better.
Posted by BlackRose on February 24, 2011 at 3:22 PM · Report this
secretagent 314
There is a magical pussy delivery service! It's called your local hooker! Don't be cheap, give her a call, and you'll have hot fresh pussy right to your door. But please don't be an asshole to her. Hookers are people too.
Posted by secretagent on February 24, 2011 at 6:07 PM · Report this
315
If your straight friend manages to fuck some sense into himself on that dildo, AHA, you might want to take a turn on it yourself.
+
Resist the urge to lesbian this thing into the ground by communicating it to death.
=
Another fabulous piece of work Savage.
Posted by timbeecharmer on February 24, 2011 at 10:37 PM · Report this
316
To the person who had a problem with ultimatums... some of us are really bad at reading signals. I mean, possibly actual neurological issues bad (never formally diagnosed, but I think I have Asperger's, and both my parents agree).

So, at some point, I might essentially say "Marry me or I'm leaving", because I honestly *can't tell* if someone is genuinely just not quite ready yet, or is doing the "if I keep leading her on, I keep getting sex" dance... (all hypothetical at this point, being bad with strangers and having a fairly small social circle makes it pretty hard to find a boyfriend [sigh]--anyone know any nice single (kinky) geek boys in their 30s or so in Arizona?)

And my male counterpart might genuinely need an ultimatum because he doesn't realize that marriage is actively important to his girlfriend, unless she makes it Very Clear to him. Not that he's unwilling to accommodate her needs and desires, just that he won't be aware of them if they're not spelled out to him in so many words.
Posted by Melissa Trible on February 27, 2011 at 2:01 AM · Report this
317
TYTF:
'Chronic dissatisfaction, that's what you have. Chronic dissatisfaction. Big sickness.' - Penelope Cruz, Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Posted by conquer on April 7, 2011 at 9:31 AM · Report this

Add a comment