Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsMonday, September 21, 2009
Savage Love Savage Love Letter of the Day
Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 5:22 PM
I am a straight female who has been with my boyfriend for close to six months now. We love each other very much and can see our relationship extending far into the future, possibly even into marriage. Here's the catch. My boyfriend suggested a threesome to me, saying that he believes in your philosophy on swinging and monogamy as you expressed here.I would have been comfortable experimenting with threesomes, foursomes, all kind of "omes," before I fell in love. I am extremely liberal and open and, in the abstract, agree with all you say about the benefits of "opening the door just a crack." Unfortunately, I am having a very strong visceral reaction to the idea of having sex with anyone but my partner or the idea of him having sex with someone else. The thought of it makes me feel sick to my stomach.
The rest of ASM's letter—and my response—after the jump.
I hope that, in the future, I will eventually feel more comfortable with the idea. My thought is that, once the chemical haze of new love wears off, perhaps I won't be so adamant about only having sex with him or so upset about the idea of him having sex with others. Although, judging by the letter you read in that clip, in which the couple has been together for 15 years, time doesn't necessarily make one feel more comfortable with sharing oneself or one's partner with extra lovers.I feel horrible that I can't provide my boyfriend with this kind of sex life, especially because I agree with the concept but can't shake my feelings about it. I also feel less progressive and less in control of myself than I'd like to be, when I think about the fact that my emotions are preventing me from engaging in a lifestyle that makes good sense and that would make my partner happy. While the things I'm willing to experiment with between the two of us are endless, I deeply wish I could provide him with this lifestyle that he believes is right for him. He says that he loves me and that I am the most important thing to him, so if I don't want to do it then he completely understands. I've said things like, "Maybe you need to find someone who wants to live the way you do." His reply, "I want you." He has expressed that, while he would love to sexually explore other people with his partner, that his partner is the most important thing to him.
Is staying with him setting myself up for future heartbreak? If we have such conflicting desires now, will they rise up later in the form of his dissatisfaction and my being deeply hurt? Is the fact that he's beginning our relationship with little faith in a monogamous lifestyle a sign that perhaps we shouldn't pursue a life together?
A Silly Monogamist
First, ASM, no two people are an exact match sexually, emotionally, socially, etc. In this, that, or the other area, each of us settles for a little less than what we we wanted—or a little less than what we thought we wanted—and each of us is a little less than what our partners thought they wanted.
So if he says he's willing to forgo this fantasy and remain monogamous in order to be with you, ASM, and you love him, well, why not choose to believe him? And if you say you might get there at some point, ASM, that you might, in time, be more comfortable with the idea, and he loves you, why shouldn't he choose to believe you?
All that said, ASM, you should ask yourself why you would be willing to do certain things—indulge in certain "omes"—with a man you don't love but not with a man you do. I don't think your relationship is necessarily doomed, but that impulse is going to complicate your love life considerably, ASM, whether or not you two remain monogamous. And deciding in advance that indulging in certain sex acts and fantasies—threesomes, other omes—means "the chemical haze of new love wears off," that the intensity is gone... that's a bad policy, a potentially fatal self-fulfilling prophecy. It's fine to want him all to yourself right now; heck, most successful, long-term, non-monogamous relationships start with a long, effortless period of sexual exclusivity. Better to think that, should the time ever comes when are ready for a threeway, that it means you're just so in love with him, and so secure of his love for you, that you don't regard a MFF threeway as a threat.
And he ought to feel the same way about a MMF threeway by then too.
3
Most "open relationships" have restrictions of some forms or another and baby steps into it isnt a bad idea, allowing for her (and him) to become used to the idea and also allows them to tweek what is and isnt working.
4
This comment is for the guy. I solute you.
Having the stones to ask your girlfriend for a threesome when it could mean that she'll dump you and spread the word that you're a creep, is a brave move that benefits all of us. More men have to take this plunge in order to add threesomes to the sacrificial treadmill that women are forced to run in order to keep up with each other. First it was pre-marital sex, then seven years of dating, then open relationships, now it's recruiting your friends. My mind spins to imagine where this sexual, commitmentless arms race will take us.
-some dude
Having the stones to ask your girlfriend for a threesome when it could mean that she'll dump you and spread the word that you're a creep, is a brave move that benefits all of us. More men have to take this plunge in order to add threesomes to the sacrificial treadmill that women are forced to run in order to keep up with each other. First it was pre-marital sex, then seven years of dating, then open relationships, now it's recruiting your friends. My mind spins to imagine where this sexual, commitmentless arms race will take us.
-some dude
7
I'm married to ASM. Not literally, of course, but I married a woman who originally was open to opening up the relationship, and then suddenly decided she wasn't.
Although all is superficially well, it is not a pleasant situation. I'm quietly bitter, and she's not budging, and it could end quite badly indeed.
Although all is superficially well, it is not a pleasant situation. I'm quietly bitter, and she's not budging, and it could end quite badly indeed.
8
I recently asked my husband if we could open up our marriage. We've been together about five years, and I started to get that itch that needed to be scratched...by someone else. We have a few rules, but really, nothing strict. I always knew we would do this, but I felt like I wanted to take the time to build our trust with one another. It has enhanced our relationship in so many ways. Oh, and fucking other people is fun.
9
Listen to your gut.
Don't feel horrible, or the slightest bit guilty.
Tell your BF you're not comfortable with it and don't know if you ever will be and if that's a problem for him good bye and good riddanse.
Your instincts are correct- the fact that he is totally uncommitted to monogamy at this stage IS a very bad omen.
Don't let Savage make you feel guilty about expecting monogamy from someone who claims to love you.
Don't feel horrible, or the slightest bit guilty.
Tell your BF you're not comfortable with it and don't know if you ever will be and if that's a problem for him good bye and good riddanse.
Your instincts are correct- the fact that he is totally uncommitted to monogamy at this stage IS a very bad omen.
Don't let Savage make you feel guilty about expecting monogamy from someone who claims to love you.
11
Maybe she's too immature to have a boyfriend, much less a husband. She doesn't say how old she is, but it sounds like she's in her late teens or early twenties. Maybe she should keep things casual for a few more years and worry about long term commitments further down the road, or at least stop demanding that her partner give her the commitment of marriage without the ring.
12
10:
It disapproves, you already know this, so your asking is redundant. It also considers women to be the property of either her father or her husband. It also permits men to have multiple wives, hence helping to eliminate their desires for infidelity. Jesus, he forgave both the adulterous woman who was brought forward for to be stoned and the woman at the well in Samaria (given the certificate of divorce 4 times and shacking up with the fifth man).
Like I said, it's all thought provoking.
It disapproves, you already know this, so your asking is redundant. It also considers women to be the property of either her father or her husband. It also permits men to have multiple wives, hence helping to eliminate their desires for infidelity. Jesus, he forgave both the adulterous woman who was brought forward for to be stoned and the woman at the well in Samaria (given the certificate of divorce 4 times and shacking up with the fifth man).
Like I said, it's all thought provoking.
13
@11 I have a little rule whereby anyone who says they've been with their partner for "close to...now" (and it's always something like six weeks or three months or eight months, some utterly trivial length of time that somehow seems like a significant milestone to them) is probably too immature to get married. I base this mostly on how significant these "milestones" seemed to me when I was, oh, 17. YMMV
14
@13 yea I have to agree. I didn't read that "6 month" part really, and now the whole message is cast into a new light.
I admit at "close-to" 6 months in my current relationship (which is now close-to 3 years, :D, hey I'm still mid-20s) I had thoughts about the longterm future, but I kept them to myself. Folks should chill out.
I admit at "close-to" 6 months in my current relationship (which is now close-to 3 years, :D, hey I'm still mid-20s) I had thoughts about the longterm future, but I kept them to myself. Folks should chill out.
15
Yeah, six months seems a bit early to contemplate marriage already. Or even to be talking about opening up the relationship already, for a lot of people. It's not unreasonable to take a year or two - or more - to build up the kind of trust it requires to open the relationship even a crack. I mean, besides the possibility of emotional heartbreak, there's the health risks (not that there isn't always a chance of a partner cheating and passing on an STI). But actively condoning outside action, or a little threeway, does require a good deal of trust that doesn't come out of nowhere.
16
Your boyfriend should be congratulated for being up front that, within 6 months, he's looking far enough into the future to know a) he wants to be with you long term, and b) he realizes that monogamy is very difficult to maintain, but he'd like to leave both of you free to induldge in the inevitable attractions you will have to other people, be it individually, or as a couple.
If those are truly his feelings and motivation, good for him, he's a keeper.
But it's awfully early in the relationship for that sort of depth, and I'm kind of getting the stink of "Dude just wants to have a threesome, and is using Savage's advice as an excuse, both for that and to justify any future fucking around he does." Which again, hats off to him for being up-front, if he's actually being honest, and not just preemptively excusing any cheating in the future.
Either way, all that needn't be a dealbreaker for ASM, but I'm also getting the "I'm gonna TRY to be into it because I love him, and keep lying to myself and giving false hope to him that I could EVENTUALLY be okay with it...even though it's never going to happen" vibe from her.
Threesomes are no big deal (and also awesome!), but "opening the door" on a 6 month old relationship seems a little premature. Feels like both parties need to be a bit more honest with themselves, and each other, about their expectations for the relationship.
If those are truly his feelings and motivation, good for him, he's a keeper.
But it's awfully early in the relationship for that sort of depth, and I'm kind of getting the stink of "Dude just wants to have a threesome, and is using Savage's advice as an excuse, both for that and to justify any future fucking around he does." Which again, hats off to him for being up-front, if he's actually being honest, and not just preemptively excusing any cheating in the future.
Either way, all that needn't be a dealbreaker for ASM, but I'm also getting the "I'm gonna TRY to be into it because I love him, and keep lying to myself and giving false hope to him that I could EVENTUALLY be okay with it...even though it's never going to happen" vibe from her.
Threesomes are no big deal (and also awesome!), but "opening the door" on a 6 month old relationship seems a little premature. Feels like both parties need to be a bit more honest with themselves, and each other, about their expectations for the relationship.
17
EVERY guy wants to have a threesome with his wife. But since when did a wife's refusal become grounds for questioning the health of the relationship? Damn, I'm feeling behind the times.
This woman's attitude about the whole thing is awesome. If the thought of her lover with someone else makes her sick, like it does for most of us poor heterosexuals, there's nothing to feel guilty about. As much as I love your sex-positive answer, Dan, practically speaking, what works for boy/boy relationships doesn't necessarily work for boy/girl relationships. The few friends I know who were given permission by their wives to sleep around eventually gave it up because it wasn't worth the hell that it caused their marriage. That's not to say poly het relationships can't work, just that the ones that do are rare.
That said, there's a good chance she might feel differently about it at a later stage in their relationship. When you've been with someonen for 10 or 15 years, and the bonds are still strong, extra-marital sex doesn't have the same meaning that it might have in the first few years.
My advice? Don't feel guilty or ashamed, don't make any promises, just be honest with your man about where you are at, and fuck and suck him on a regular basis. And some day, you may be able to endulge his FFM fantasy.
This woman's attitude about the whole thing is awesome. If the thought of her lover with someone else makes her sick, like it does for most of us poor heterosexuals, there's nothing to feel guilty about. As much as I love your sex-positive answer, Dan, practically speaking, what works for boy/boy relationships doesn't necessarily work for boy/girl relationships. The few friends I know who were given permission by their wives to sleep around eventually gave it up because it wasn't worth the hell that it caused their marriage. That's not to say poly het relationships can't work, just that the ones that do are rare.
That said, there's a good chance she might feel differently about it at a later stage in their relationship. When you've been with someonen for 10 or 15 years, and the bonds are still strong, extra-marital sex doesn't have the same meaning that it might have in the first few years.
My advice? Don't feel guilty or ashamed, don't make any promises, just be honest with your man about where you are at, and fuck and suck him on a regular basis. And some day, you may be able to endulge his FFM fantasy.
18
Dan I really think you pulled the wrong rein on this one. You should have given her your standard "don't be a liberal pussy" answer. I don't think that the OP should have to feel guilty about not wanting her boyfriend to shag other girls. If she is ok with it, fine. But she's not, and there is absolutely noting wrong with that.
It's all well and good to be sex positive, but I think it goes too far when people in vanilla relationships feel like freaks, or feel that they're closed minded, because aspects of a more "adventurous" lifestyle aren't for them (as you often say in the context of people thinking they're weird for not having a kink).
But hey, that's just my humble opinion - one of 6 (?) billion in the world...
It's all well and good to be sex positive, but I think it goes too far when people in vanilla relationships feel like freaks, or feel that they're closed minded, because aspects of a more "adventurous" lifestyle aren't for them (as you often say in the context of people thinking they're weird for not having a kink).
But hey, that's just my humble opinion - one of 6 (?) billion in the world...
19
Either play the field or get off it.
3-somes are for chicken dudes who want to bed more than one woman, but don't want to "risk" their safe lay.
99 times out of 100 the chick will find some other guy for the 3-some and he'll end up getting 80 percent of the sex (without you) anyway...and you'll probably be paying all the bills to...and since you asked for it, you won't have a leg to stand on!
Go stag, or get married.
There's no in between in the Book of Duderonomy.
3-somes are for chicken dudes who want to bed more than one woman, but don't want to "risk" their safe lay.
99 times out of 100 the chick will find some other guy for the 3-some and he'll end up getting 80 percent of the sex (without you) anyway...and you'll probably be paying all the bills to...and since you asked for it, you won't have a leg to stand on!
Go stag, or get married.
There's no in between in the Book of Duderonomy.
20
"That's not to say poly het relationships can't work, just that the ones that do are rare."
No kidding. All that stuff about women and men basically wanting the same things? Sorry, but I've never seen it. I honestly don't know how heterosexuality is at all workable.
No kidding. All that stuff about women and men basically wanting the same things? Sorry, but I've never seen it. I honestly don't know how heterosexuality is at all workable.
21
Give it time. I was strongly opposed to such things at six months too, and so was my partner. We've been together nearly seven years now, and agree that if we're going to have sex with other people, we're going to do it together. We're still monogamous thus far, but leaving the door open *just a little* gives us room to be more honest with each other. I trust him more because I know that if there's another woman he wants to sleep with, he'll tell me about it because a threesome is that much more appealing than him sneaking off to do things on his own.
23
Hi Kim - you too. Nice and warm here today - 33 degrees (that's 91 farenheit!) Hope you've been wearing down the fretboard on that strat of yours...
24
Whether she relents or not, ASM should make it very clear to this guy that there is a chance that she will never, ever, ever, ever feel comfortable with this. Please. Be clear. Don't be ambiguous, or suggest that it will happen if it won't. I've seen these relationships where one person was assured such things would be fine "someday", and that day never showed up. Much anger resulted.
25
I have, just changed her strings today, and gave her the work over. Why are guitars shes? How's your ax?
Summer gave us a nice send off today, 31 degrees. Soon the Autumn rains will come in, I'll be playing more. Ahh, the fire, the whiskey ...
Summer gave us a nice send off today, 31 degrees. Soon the Autumn rains will come in, I'll be playing more. Ahh, the fire, the whiskey ...
27
Kim, I always feel like I want to chat more but feel awkward taking up space on slog. If you're game send me an email at taj68@live.com.au and I'll regale you with talk of guitars, whiskey, theology...
28
ASM's situation sounds pretty familiar - up to a point. I am in an open relationship, and happily so, but there was a stretch of time when my girlfriend wanted a lot more openness than I did and it was pretty rough. ASM sounds at least open to the possibility, and the boyfriend sounds like he's making their relationship a priority, both these things are good - but she still signs off as a monogamist...
My biggest question would be does she see herself getting more monogamous or more experimental, (if she can tell yet)? It's entirely possible that with time she'll feel more confident in their connection (especially if the bf keeps being reassuring) and playing with others will be an okay fun thing to do from time to time. But if it doesn't, they both need to know if that's a deal-breaker.
My biggest question would be does she see herself getting more monogamous or more experimental, (if she can tell yet)? It's entirely possible that with time she'll feel more confident in their connection (especially if the bf keeps being reassuring) and playing with others will be an okay fun thing to do from time to time. But if it doesn't, they both need to know if that's a deal-breaker.
29
Right, so um... Dude's girlfriend isn't into the idea of a three-way. I'm pretty sure that is very normal. You hit the nail on the head with your last statement about him being open with an MMF threesome. And while the letter doesn't specify what type of multi action he's craving, I think it's pretty obvious he wants to bang another chick. Is it possible that she's making too big a deal out of this? Maybe he was just asking because of the latent media-driven idea that two girls and a guy is the ultimate sexual experience.
31
kudos @ 18
Sheesh, wtf is up with you people?? Ok, ok, ok.... being open to various sexual experiences is good. However, some things just don't work for everyone. I don't see Dan banging chicks. I don't see polyamorous people sticking to monogamous relationships. Why should I see a monogamous person forcing herself into polyamory? Feels like she's trying to fit some sort of imagined status quo.
She shows a sincere desire to please her boyfriend, she thinks he has an honest consideration for her feelings. I think this is an extremely solid foundation for a relationship and it isn't "not necessarily doomed" because she doesn't want to do a threesome. It's pretty necessarily gonna last as well as any relationship, and better than most.
Sheesh, wtf is up with you people?? Ok, ok, ok.... being open to various sexual experiences is good. However, some things just don't work for everyone. I don't see Dan banging chicks. I don't see polyamorous people sticking to monogamous relationships. Why should I see a monogamous person forcing herself into polyamory? Feels like she's trying to fit some sort of imagined status quo.
She shows a sincere desire to please her boyfriend, she thinks he has an honest consideration for her feelings. I think this is an extremely solid foundation for a relationship and it isn't "not necessarily doomed" because she doesn't want to do a threesome. It's pretty necessarily gonna last as well as any relationship, and better than most.
32
@29 "Maybe he was just asking because of the latent media-driven idea that two girls and a guy is the ultimate sexual experience."
Media driven? Give me a fucking break.
Every gay male friend I know has had multiple partners at some point, and it ain't because they were brainwashed by the media. It's because having one person eagerly sucking your cock while the other enthusiastically licks your balls and ass feels, both physically and emotionally, rather nice.
If a straight boy has that option, and he turns it down, then he is simply out of touch with himself. And he should be taken out back and shot.
Alas, most of us straight boys never have this option, because, as you pointed out, this lady's reaction is quite normal.
Media driven? Give me a fucking break.
Every gay male friend I know has had multiple partners at some point, and it ain't because they were brainwashed by the media. It's because having one person eagerly sucking your cock while the other enthusiastically licks your balls and ass feels, both physically and emotionally, rather nice.
If a straight boy has that option, and he turns it down, then he is simply out of touch with himself. And he should be taken out back and shot.
Alas, most of us straight boys never have this option, because, as you pointed out, this lady's reaction is quite normal.
33
@ 32
It is kinda media driven. A lot of things are. Like Fruit Loops? Think you actually like them? Maybe, maybe not.
It is kinda media driven. A lot of things are. Like Fruit Loops? Think you actually like them? Maybe, maybe not.
34
Hey ASM, if you're serious about considering the idea, might I recommend a book that is something of a cliche on the topic; "The Ethical Slut." Seriously I tried poly and it wasn't for me. But there's a lot of good communication advice in that book that I would strongly recommend to anyone - gay, straight, poly, mono, whatever. Unfortunately, it comes with some mystical mumbo-jumbo (one of the authors is Wiccan I believe) but it's still a pretty good book overall.
35
12
The Bible does not recount Jesus forgiving either of those women.
How would you advise ASM?
Will infidelity make her boyfriend 'happy'?
The Bible does not recount Jesus forgiving either of those women.
How would you advise ASM?
Will infidelity make her boyfriend 'happy'?
36
I haven't read the whole column, only skimmed it, so this is a cursory reply.
Dan, you are hot at a podium. And this is a straight guy talking.
Jane14 @35, you are so speaking for the new atheists.
The concept of fidis from which faith and fidelity come are neither about sexual monogamy or belief, but loyalty, as represented in the old proverb:
If the king says it is night
In the middle of the day
Look up and behold the stars.
In this case king can be replaced with God, church, bible or husband. For example: if the Church decrees that something absurd is, in fact, truth, then that is your truth, even when your eyes and heart tell you otherwise.
Fidelity is loyalty to your husband, though not necessarily sexual exclusivity, but obedience. If he tells you to go down on your (biological) sister, or to blow his best friend, to not do so is infidelity to your husband.
Your obedience to your husband comes first, then your loyalty to your king. (Sorry, no democracy for you.) Then, at last, comes your faith to God.
Of course, in the post-modern era, when women are considered to have souls and not be property and have rights equal to men, things are a bit different within society, but if you choose to keep the faith, you may also find yourself obliged to loyalty and obedience.
Dan, you are hot at a podium. And this is a straight guy talking.
Jane14 @35, you are so speaking for the new atheists.
The concept of fidis from which faith and fidelity come are neither about sexual monogamy or belief, but loyalty, as represented in the old proverb:
If the king says it is night
In the middle of the day
Look up and behold the stars.
In this case king can be replaced with God, church, bible or husband. For example: if the Church decrees that something absurd is, in fact, truth, then that is your truth, even when your eyes and heart tell you otherwise.
Fidelity is loyalty to your husband, though not necessarily sexual exclusivity, but obedience. If he tells you to go down on your (biological) sister, or to blow his best friend, to not do so is infidelity to your husband.
Your obedience to your husband comes first, then your loyalty to your king. (Sorry, no democracy for you.) Then, at last, comes your faith to God.
Of course, in the post-modern era, when women are considered to have souls and not be property and have rights equal to men, things are a bit different within society, but if you choose to keep the faith, you may also find yourself obliged to loyalty and obedience.
37
Jeez, am I the only girl who has the opposite problem? I'd really like to seriously think about a threesome (and admittedly, yes, I'm more into a MMF fantasy than a FFM, though I've talked about both), but while my boyfriend says he's always enjoyed the fantasy, he can't "share" me. He also doesn't have the enthusiasm of @32; whereas other guys can't let go of how awesome it *must be*, he can't let go how wrong it *could go.* E.g. I'll end up loving fucking women instead of him. He doesn't even enjoy dirty-talking about it.
38
And yeah, ASM? It's OK to change your mind, or rather, to honestly realize that you weren't actually sure. It's hard to be consistent with your feelings about a hypothetical idea and the reality of it. It's normal and it's human. The scum we're all thinking of are women who string along men with outright lies. But, you still need to remember this. Keep this in mind as your relationship goes on, and be really fucking honest with yourself about this if marriage ever does come up. If you have to tell him you're not "sure" about whether you'd do something -- which can be massively misinterpreted as "you can hound and convince me" -- be extremely clear and forceful about what that means.
39
ASM: I really don't recommend *telling* him that one day, it could happen -- even way, way down the road as some suggest here. Yes, it *could* but if you plan to marry this guy, err on the side of caution and go with your gut negative feeling. Conventional wisdom: It's always easier to change a no to a yes than to change a yes (or maybe) to a no.
40
ASM, if you're typical then your are quite right that things will change once the chemistry settles down. The problem is that it's your desire to have your partner to yourself that will remain strong and your sexual desires that will wain. This will lead to bitterness and despair on his part if you give it enough time. You need to find a nice guy with tamer tastes.
41
I have no advice for ASM, but I must say I dream of meeting a chick like gloria (37). MMF is H O T!!!
42
@36
Right.
What color is the sky in your world?
We are talking about Fido's fidelity to AMS...
fidelity - 4 dictionary results
Etymology: Middle English fidelite, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French fidelité, from Latin fidelitat-, fidelitas, from fidelis FAITHFUL, from fides faith, from fidere TO TRUST
fi-del-i-ty /fɪˈdɛlɪti, faɪ-/
Pronunciation [fi-del-i-tee, fahy-]
–noun, plural -ties.
1. strict observance of promises, duties, etc.
2. conjugal faithfulness.
3. the quality or state of being faithful
4. loyalty: fidelity to one's country.
synonyms-- fidelity, loyalty.
fidelity- implies strict and continuing faithfulness to an obligation, trust, or duty .
loyalty- implies a faithfulness that is steadfast in the face of any temptation to renounce, desert, or betray
btw- when you say you are 'straight' does your face twitch?
Right.
What color is the sky in your world?
We are talking about Fido's fidelity to AMS...
fidelity - 4 dictionary results
Etymology: Middle English fidelite, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French fidelité, from Latin fidelitat-, fidelitas, from fidelis FAITHFUL, from fides faith, from fidere TO TRUST
fi-del-i-ty /fɪˈdɛlɪti, faɪ-/
Pronunciation [fi-del-i-tee, fahy-]
–noun, plural -ties.
1. strict observance of promises, duties, etc.
2. conjugal faithfulness.
3. the quality or state of being faithful
4. loyalty: fidelity to one's country.
synonyms-- fidelity, loyalty.
fidelity- implies strict and continuing faithfulness to an obligation, trust, or duty .
loyalty- implies a faithfulness that is steadfast in the face of any temptation to renounce, desert, or betray
btw- when you say you are 'straight' does your face twitch?
44
Forget the threesome part of this mess, I can't get past the "we've been together close to six months" and already talking about marriage part! This dude needs to dump this girl now, and get it over with.
45
Dan is unequiped to give ASM advice. This is a question of relationship and loyalty and Love.
Not 'love' in the snarky, ironic, sarcastic way it is used in the title Savage Love but actual Love. The kind that is transends sex.
ASM feels love and the idea of cheating hits her in the gut.
Her BF and Dan think in terms of cheap new erotic thrills (that soon become passe and boring) but have no comprehension of love.
Dan sees relationships as vehicles for sex. And his advice is aplicable for someone in a relationship for the sex. Spice it up (because if it is just about the sex it will inevitably get boring). Find a new orifice or a new partner. Move on to the next trick to try to keep it fresh.
Love doesn't need gimmicks.
ASM should hold out for love.
Not 'love' in the snarky, ironic, sarcastic way it is used in the title Savage Love but actual Love. The kind that is transends sex.
ASM feels love and the idea of cheating hits her in the gut.
Her BF and Dan think in terms of cheap new erotic thrills (that soon become passe and boring) but have no comprehension of love.
Dan sees relationships as vehicles for sex. And his advice is aplicable for someone in a relationship for the sex. Spice it up (because if it is just about the sex it will inevitably get boring). Find a new orifice or a new partner. Move on to the next trick to try to keep it fresh.
Love doesn't need gimmicks.
ASM should hold out for love.
46
@40
Because no one who has sexual tastes outside strict monogamy could possibly be "nice". No, they're all cruel, open, communicative bastards.
Because no one who has sexual tastes outside strict monogamy could possibly be "nice". No, they're all cruel, open, communicative bastards.
47
Every day I'm thankful I didn't end up with someone as clueless about both love and sex as big momma@45.
48
@45, in an odd way I agree with you. Yes, exciting and mutually fulfilling sex does become passe and boring for some. For some of us it doesn't. It is extremely important to make sure that those two types of people do not end up together. Big momma, if you're a guy you are a particularly unreflective one.
@40, point well taken. I should not have assumed that you all would have put quotes around the "nice".
@40, point well taken. I should not have assumed that you all would have put quotes around the "nice".
50
35: You're going to have to go back and read your Bible again, because it does recount Jesus forgiving the adulterous woman, and his investing time into the lonely Samaritan woman at the well.
I don't have any real advice for ASM. If she was my friend, we could sit down at talk about it. I could share from my perspective on being monogamous, and discuss the pros and cons of opening up her relationship, but in the end the decision would be theirs' to make.
So, if you read this ASM. I think you should trust your own internal moral code, some would call it your conscience, and maintain an open and honest conversation with your boyfriend. If your a person of faith, devote a large amount of time praying about it. It's my opinion that you should give yourself time, six months is not a LTR by my definition.
Happy now, 35?
I don't have any real advice for ASM. If she was my friend, we could sit down at talk about it. I could share from my perspective on being monogamous, and discuss the pros and cons of opening up her relationship, but in the end the decision would be theirs' to make.
So, if you read this ASM. I think you should trust your own internal moral code, some would call it your conscience, and maintain an open and honest conversation with your boyfriend. If your a person of faith, devote a large amount of time praying about it. It's my opinion that you should give yourself time, six months is not a LTR by my definition.
Happy now, 35?
51
@45 "... but actual Love. The kind that is transends sex."
Sorry to say, Big Momma, but for many guys, sex is an integral component of love, just as cuddling and talking about feelings probably is for you.
A woman who willfully witholds sex from such a man rejects who he is, and therefore can not possibly love him.
Sorry to say, Big Momma, but for many guys, sex is an integral component of love, just as cuddling and talking about feelings probably is for you.
A woman who willfully witholds sex from such a man rejects who he is, and therefore can not possibly love him.
52
50
And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Nothing about forgiving her.
And spending time with the lonely Samaritan woman at the well is not the same as forgiving her.
The scriptures do not 'disapprove' of adultery- they condemn it strongly and unambiguously:
And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? …
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery...
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? … but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery...
Jesus showed the way to happiness and joy in this life and the life to come.
Adultery is not part of the plan.
Those who have been warned might share that unambiguous good news with those not yet enlightened, it is a great act of love to do so.
ASM IS being prompted by her conscience to make the right choice, the choice that will help her find true happiness and joy. It would be nice if someone encouraged her to follow that worthy prompting.
(Be)… not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth…
50
And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Nothing about forgiving her.
And spending time with the lonely Samaritan woman at the well is not the same as forgiving her.
The scriptures do not 'disapprove' of adultery- they condemn it strongly and unambiguously:
And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? …
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery...
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? … but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery...
Jesus showed the way to happiness and joy in this life and the life to come.
Adultery is not part of the plan.
Those who have been warned might share that unambiguous good news with those not yet enlightened, it is a great act of love to do so.
ASM IS being prompted by her conscience to make the right choice, the choice that will help her find true happiness and joy. It would be nice if someone encouraged her to follow that worthy prompting.
(Be)… not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth…
53
48 51 etc
A loving relation ship does transcend sex. If one partner were physically unable to have sex the love would endure and the relationship continue as strong as before.
With Dan the relationship is subservient to the sex- when it gets boring it is time to tinker with or expand the circle or dump and move on.
Sex, even really hot sex, is not an adequate foundation for a successful longterm relationship. Boredom will always set in sooner or later. If it is mainly about sex then the 'pressure valve' of other partners will seem desirable. And, frankly, if it is just about sex then non-monogamy will keep it going for you longer.
Love, based on mutual values, goals and respect; is enhanced by sex but not founded on it. And in a loving relationship the sex will always be good because it grows out of and is an expression of the love and is not an end in and of itself.
Love is the cake.
Sex is the icing.
The cake is good without the icing but even better with it.
The icing without the cake, however, gives you a bellyache.
Chance the name of the column, Dan.
Lust Letter of the Day.
What's Love got to do with it?
A loving relation ship does transcend sex. If one partner were physically unable to have sex the love would endure and the relationship continue as strong as before.
With Dan the relationship is subservient to the sex- when it gets boring it is time to tinker with or expand the circle or dump and move on.
Sex, even really hot sex, is not an adequate foundation for a successful longterm relationship. Boredom will always set in sooner or later. If it is mainly about sex then the 'pressure valve' of other partners will seem desirable. And, frankly, if it is just about sex then non-monogamy will keep it going for you longer.
Love, based on mutual values, goals and respect; is enhanced by sex but not founded on it. And in a loving relationship the sex will always be good because it grows out of and is an expression of the love and is not an end in and of itself.
Love is the cake.
Sex is the icing.
The cake is good without the icing but even better with it.
The icing without the cake, however, gives you a bellyache.
Chance the name of the column, Dan.
Lust Letter of the Day.
What's Love got to do with it?
55
@53 - no, for YOU, love is the cake and sex is the icing. Or at least you've had that "correct" answer pounded into you effectively.
For much of the rest of humanity, love is the cake and sex is ice cream - tasty together, but also each enjoyable on their own, and independently. If you've never encountered a married couple where one partner was completely, utterly bored in the bedroom, even if everything else was fine and they loved each other, then you don't know many married couples. Or perhaps you ARE part of that married couple, and don't realize it yet.
For much of the rest of humanity, love is the cake and sex is ice cream - tasty together, but also each enjoyable on their own, and independently. If you've never encountered a married couple where one partner was completely, utterly bored in the bedroom, even if everything else was fine and they loved each other, then you don't know many married couples. Or perhaps you ARE part of that married couple, and don't realize it yet.
56
Hey jane14 @ 52 and 35, here's a thought: be not ashamed of the gospel of Christ and REGISTER to post your comments. Kim has credibility here because she is honest, open, thoughtful, and accountable. You, my dear, are just a lurker. Why you lurk, we cannot tell, but we wonder if you are ashamed of the gospel of Christ (because you are lurking).
And Kim, turn the unregistered comments off, OK? Jane isn't worth your time.
And Kim, turn the unregistered comments off, OK? Jane isn't worth your time.
57
@53
I don't think we are in radical disagreement. In the context of a relationship, sex is (for me anyway) the ultimate expression of love.
If a woman voluntarily and perpetually refuses to express her love for her man (e.g., because the Bible or Andrea Dworkin tells her so), does she really truly love him? I would say no, she does not.
If this means of expression is somehow taken away from her (e.g,. by some trauma), that is obviously a different story, and a sad one at that.
I don't think we are in radical disagreement. In the context of a relationship, sex is (for me anyway) the ultimate expression of love.
If a woman voluntarily and perpetually refuses to express her love for her man (e.g., because the Bible or Andrea Dworkin tells her so), does she really truly love him? I would say no, she does not.
If this means of expression is somehow taken away from her (e.g,. by some trauma), that is obviously a different story, and a sad one at that.
58
57
Thanks for your comments, I don't disagree with you, I wasn't rebuting as much as just following up.
Thanks for your comments, I don't disagree with you, I wasn't rebuting as much as just following up.
59
@56
My comments have no credibility with you because I am not registered?
And if I register and Jane14 appears in bold suddenly my comments have value to you?
How odd.
My comments have no credibility with you because I am not registered?
And if I register and Jane14 appears in bold suddenly my comments have value to you?
How odd.
60
@53
One more thing - if you really believe true love "transcends" sex, then you wouldn't have a problem with your man fucking other women.
I'm guessing, however, that you would have a big problem with that, in which case you don't really believe what you are saying.
One more thing - if you really believe true love "transcends" sex, then you wouldn't have a problem with your man fucking other women.
I'm guessing, however, that you would have a big problem with that, in which case you don't really believe what you are saying.
61
No Jane14, that's not what I said. I said you were a pretty sorry witness for Christ, hiding behind your anonymity. Makes me wonder if YOU have something to hide.
62
52:
You poor thing, the Good News of the Gospel is that God's forgiveness precedes his condemnation, thats what the Bible says in John 3:16. To enter into a relationship, you have to have accepted his forgiveness. The woman at the well, came to faith and brought all the towns people out to meet him, and the adulterous woman washed his feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with her perfume. Christ said she loved much, because she had been forgiven much. Both women, had his forgiveness before they even asked. Just as you did when you turned to him. Just as in the parable of the prodigal son.
Neither of the two women are alive to share their testimonies, if it pleases you to believe that Christ did not forgive them. That God does not forgive. Then who am I to disagree with your opinion. After all faith defies all logic, and can't be supported with facts. Even different translations of the Bible, and denominations see differently on the subject of these to women. It's your opinion, use it to live your own life, make your life conform to your belief system, live in accordance with your conscience.
Leave others to live according to their own belief system and their own conscience. Give people the respect they deserve.
You poor thing, the Good News of the Gospel is that God's forgiveness precedes his condemnation, thats what the Bible says in John 3:16. To enter into a relationship, you have to have accepted his forgiveness. The woman at the well, came to faith and brought all the towns people out to meet him, and the adulterous woman washed his feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with her perfume. Christ said she loved much, because she had been forgiven much. Both women, had his forgiveness before they even asked. Just as you did when you turned to him. Just as in the parable of the prodigal son.
Neither of the two women are alive to share their testimonies, if it pleases you to believe that Christ did not forgive them. That God does not forgive. Then who am I to disagree with your opinion. After all faith defies all logic, and can't be supported with facts. Even different translations of the Bible, and denominations see differently on the subject of these to women. It's your opinion, use it to live your own life, make your life conform to your belief system, live in accordance with your conscience.
Leave others to live according to their own belief system and their own conscience. Give people the respect they deserve.
63
60
If 'my man' loves me he will manage to keep his desires to fuck other women under control. His love will transcend his desire for extramarital sex. This is really not a radical concept or difficult thing for many people.
If 'my man' loves me he will manage to keep his desires to fuck other women under control. His love will transcend his desire for extramarital sex. This is really not a radical concept or difficult thing for many people.
65
@62
Christ's saving grace is extended to all who have faith, repent and demonstrate it by keeping His commandments. His love is unconditional but he will not save us in our sins. John 3:16 says that "whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life".
I did not say that Christ did not forgive the women, I said that the account we have in the Bible does not tell us if that is so. The adulterous woman brought to be stoned was used to make a point about hypocricy, not adultery. Her story is misused to imply that adultery is not a grevious sin and that is not true. She seems from the account sincere and on the path of repentance however Christ does not forgive before we ask, but after we present a broken repentant heart and a contrite spirit and faith sufficient to work a change in our lives. We demonstarte this by obeying the commandments.
It pleases me that Christ has revealed the strait gate and narrow way to Eternal Life.
I am sorry if quizzing you has made you uncomfortable, that was not the intent. I am aware that you are versed in the Bible and was interested in your take on Dan's casual attitude toward infidelity. I mean and feel no disrespect to your belief system.
Thank you for your answer.
Christ's saving grace is extended to all who have faith, repent and demonstrate it by keeping His commandments. His love is unconditional but he will not save us in our sins. John 3:16 says that "whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life".
I did not say that Christ did not forgive the women, I said that the account we have in the Bible does not tell us if that is so. The adulterous woman brought to be stoned was used to make a point about hypocricy, not adultery. Her story is misused to imply that adultery is not a grevious sin and that is not true. She seems from the account sincere and on the path of repentance however Christ does not forgive before we ask, but after we present a broken repentant heart and a contrite spirit and faith sufficient to work a change in our lives. We demonstarte this by obeying the commandments.
It pleases me that Christ has revealed the strait gate and narrow way to Eternal Life.
I am sorry if quizzing you has made you uncomfortable, that was not the intent. I am aware that you are versed in the Bible and was interested in your take on Dan's casual attitude toward infidelity. I mean and feel no disrespect to your belief system.
Thank you for your answer.
66
@48 "Yes, exciting and mutually fulfilling sex does become passe and boring for some. For some of us it doesn't. It is extremely important to make sure that those two types of people do not end up together."
You hit the nail on the head, a little too close to home. Unfortunately, sometimes it is not clear which type of person you are, until you have been married for a long-enough-time to be entrenched with a child and a home. I love my husband and family but still.....feeling a bit wistful after reading your sentence.
You hit the nail on the head, a little too close to home. Unfortunately, sometimes it is not clear which type of person you are, until you have been married for a long-enough-time to be entrenched with a child and a home. I love my husband and family but still.....feeling a bit wistful after reading your sentence.
67
65:
I didn't feel you were quizzing me, I was amused. You ask me something, that you already have the answer to. I'm not sure why you or anyone else would think my opinion of Savage's advice is relevant. He does not consult me when offering advice. I'm not his judge, I allow him his own opinion even if I disagree with it.
In short, I wish you and others would take your issues up with Savage, himself. I hold no sway with him.
Next time offer your advice straight to ASM. It's rather impolite of us to hijack a thread to discuss scripture.
I didn't feel you were quizzing me, I was amused. You ask me something, that you already have the answer to. I'm not sure why you or anyone else would think my opinion of Savage's advice is relevant. He does not consult me when offering advice. I'm not his judge, I allow him his own opinion even if I disagree with it.
In short, I wish you and others would take your issues up with Savage, himself. I hold no sway with him.
Next time offer your advice straight to ASM. It's rather impolite of us to hijack a thread to discuss scripture.
68
Jane14 @42 I must have hit a nerve if you feel the need to retaliate. But no, I don't twitch when I call myself straight, but neither do I twitch when I call myself gay either.
Incidentally, contemporary definitions of a word don't necessarily affect what was meant by them in prior eras. I take you don't think the Flintstones' line we'll have a gay ol' time is about faggery. Yes?
You illustrate my point. Christianity is an old, old religion and it presumed a lot that is considered amoral or downright silly. If you insist on interpreting your faith in a traditional sense, then expect all the traditions to be in affect, hence women are soulless chattel, worth more than livestock only in a quantitative sense. And when someone asks you what is in the center of the Solar system, you have to proclaim the Earth not because it is true, but because the word of God has proclaimed it so, and you must oblige.
Or you can reinterpret your faith into a contemporary context, which might allow for things like gender equality or, being more loyal to your heart and mind than some scholar's interpretation of scripture, and reinterpretations of victimless strictures, such as the the issues of adultery and fornication which are better served better in contemporary relationships as issues of communication between partners.
In the meantime, see to the motes in your own eyes, and let others worry about the specks in theirs.
I still haven't had a chance to read the page.
Incidentally, contemporary definitions of a word don't necessarily affect what was meant by them in prior eras. I take you don't think the Flintstones' line we'll have a gay ol' time is about faggery. Yes?
You illustrate my point. Christianity is an old, old religion and it presumed a lot that is considered amoral or downright silly. If you insist on interpreting your faith in a traditional sense, then expect all the traditions to be in affect, hence women are soulless chattel, worth more than livestock only in a quantitative sense. And when someone asks you what is in the center of the Solar system, you have to proclaim the Earth not because it is true, but because the word of God has proclaimed it so, and you must oblige.
Or you can reinterpret your faith into a contemporary context, which might allow for things like gender equality or, being more loyal to your heart and mind than some scholar's interpretation of scripture, and reinterpretations of victimless strictures, such as the the issues of adultery and fornication which are better served better in contemporary relationships as issues of communication between partners.
In the meantime, see to the motes in your own eyes, and let others worry about the specks in theirs.
I still haven't had a chance to read the page.
69
@68
"Incidentally, contemporary definitions of a word don't necessarily affect what was meant by them in prior eras."
Right.
I used the word 'infidelity' at 1:12am today.
For your convenience I posted the definition above, also taken from today.
The word does not appear in the Bible.
The concept of adultery and fornication do.
They are hardly victimless when spouses and children (some yet to be born) are involved.
And no scholars interpretation is required.
I find Christianity to be vital, relevant and up to the moment.
What motes do you find in my eyes?
"Incidentally, contemporary definitions of a word don't necessarily affect what was meant by them in prior eras."
Right.
I used the word 'infidelity' at 1:12am today.
For your convenience I posted the definition above, also taken from today.
The word does not appear in the Bible.
The concept of adultery and fornication do.
They are hardly victimless when spouses and children (some yet to be born) are involved.
And no scholars interpretation is required.
I find Christianity to be vital, relevant and up to the moment.
What motes do you find in my eyes?
70
Ah, Jane14 @69, but when concerning the bible, someone else's scholarly interpretation is always involved, unless you are a biblical scholar, yourself, and understand the ancient Hebrew or the Greek (which no-one in the contemporary era completely does -- they're long dead languages). So long as you're depending on a version of the bible, you're going to get some human opinion with your word of God, and that presumes Constantine was divinely inspired when he added his own Apollonian revisions.
Chances are you just take the word of some present-day ministry that their interpretation of the gospel is true, and that the thousands of other denominations are all false. But please, correct me if I'm wrong.
As for adultery, as I said, the problems solved by such a proscription would be handled more holistically if the focus was on communication. The restriction to exclusivity may suit those couples who prefer to keep it that way (and are capable of doing so), but some couples may want more latitude. It's a misnomer that non-monogamy is indicative that the love between a couple is somehow less valid or less passionate as a result; in fact, it can suggest a greater bond since it takes a level of trust to allow one's significant other to venture into the arms of another and return.
Regarding fornication, I recognize that some folks enjoy the requirement of recognition and approval of a clerical authority, such as a church to affirm that their own actions are sound. I, for one, prefer to choose for myself who I am allowed to love, even if she (or he) is a different race or religion than I am, or even if they are more than one person.
I've stated many times before, the ethic of reciprocity serves as a pretty good universal rule of engagement.
That said, your eyes are your own business, and mine are mine. But I would caution you from presuming that your straight and narrow pathway to salvation is anyone's but your very own.
More...
Chances are you just take the word of some present-day ministry that their interpretation of the gospel is true, and that the thousands of other denominations are all false. But please, correct me if I'm wrong.
As for adultery, as I said, the problems solved by such a proscription would be handled more holistically if the focus was on communication. The restriction to exclusivity may suit those couples who prefer to keep it that way (and are capable of doing so), but some couples may want more latitude. It's a misnomer that non-monogamy is indicative that the love between a couple is somehow less valid or less passionate as a result; in fact, it can suggest a greater bond since it takes a level of trust to allow one's significant other to venture into the arms of another and return.
Regarding fornication, I recognize that some folks enjoy the requirement of recognition and approval of a clerical authority, such as a church to affirm that their own actions are sound. I, for one, prefer to choose for myself who I am allowed to love, even if she (or he) is a different race or religion than I am, or even if they are more than one person.
I've stated many times before, the ethic of reciprocity serves as a pretty good universal rule of engagement.
That said, your eyes are your own business, and mine are mine. But I would caution you from presuming that your straight and narrow pathway to salvation is anyone's but your very own.
71
Having read the original letter and response (but still only scanned the commentary) I have to agree with Dan. At the moment, it's not a conflict of interests between ASM and her boyfriend. In fact, I'm not even clear that the beau necessarily wants to engage in multi-partner sex. Were it a deal-breaker for him, it'd be a bridge to build, but for now, they're into each other exclusively, so all is good.
And, ASM should look at why experimentation with multiple sex partners was once exciting in a non-committal scenario, but is nauseating while she's in love, not because she must break this spell and become a swinger again, but rather as a matter of personal introspection. Self-awareness is invariably a good thing, whether in a spiritual sense, i.e. seeking Nirvana (or the Kingdom of Heaven), or even merely in an interpersonal sense simply seeking to play better with herself and others.
And, ASM should look at why experimentation with multiple sex partners was once exciting in a non-committal scenario, but is nauseating while she's in love, not because she must break this spell and become a swinger again, but rather as a matter of personal introspection. Self-awareness is invariably a good thing, whether in a spiritual sense, i.e. seeking Nirvana (or the Kingdom of Heaven), or even merely in an interpersonal sense simply seeking to play better with herself and others.
72
@67
You never mind discussing scripture when you're assuring the homosexuals the Bible and God endorse sodomy.
Are you afraid if you come out against Adultery and Fornication the cool gay kids you envy so much won't be your friends anymore?
You never mind discussing scripture when you're assuring the homosexuals the Bible and God endorse sodomy.
Are you afraid if you come out against Adultery and Fornication the cool gay kids you envy so much won't be your friends anymore?
73
Nice try 72,
This thread isn't about me, it's about giving advice to ASM, which I already did.
If you have advice to offer ASM, then do so. If you disagree with the advice Savage offered, then tell him so.
You're opinion concerning any comments made by me, are only relevant to you. To me your opinion is irrelevant. You're going to have to find someone else to masturbate with, I'm not playing feed the trolls.
This thread isn't about me, it's about giving advice to ASM, which I already did.
If you have advice to offer ASM, then do so. If you disagree with the advice Savage offered, then tell him so.
You're opinion concerning any comments made by me, are only relevant to you. To me your opinion is irrelevant. You're going to have to find someone else to masturbate with, I'm not playing feed the trolls.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Whitney Is Dead, And So Is Hollywood by Kelly O
-
Planned Parenthood Exposed! by David Schmader
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (74) RSS