Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, July 20, 2011
Savage Love SL Letter of the Day: Pity Fucking Around
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:11 PM
I discovered your column recently and have decided (1) I should have found you long, long ago and (2) I need your advice.
My husband and I live in a conservative part of the country. We have been in a committed, monogamous relationship for over six years and married just under half of that time. And I, the formerly-slutty bisexual wife, suggested swinging. It's going well, but slower than I wanted. We spend a lot of time looking on CL and AFF together, which has resulted in some meetings and a few odd encounters.
Last weekend while on our way to a "party" we stopped at a restaurant. In anticipation of a night of debauchery, I was sending some vibes into the universe—and I caught someone's attention. The next day, I was someone's missed connection on CL. Thinking it was this guy with a cute girlfriend, I responded to it and let my husband know. Turns out it's this sweet guy, whom I did share a smile with when I noticed him checking me out, whose wife has cancer—like the kind that really is killing you and nothing is stopping it. (I saw her at the restaurant, she was clearly very ill, so I don't think he's a CPOS.) He says he hasn't had sex in over a year and has another year or so of her illness to "get through" and he misses being touched and, yes, fucking.
I told my husband and he says we can't help this guy. I think this guy just needs to be intimate with someone. And I feel like I want to be that person.
I know where you stand on this for the guy—he needs to do what he needs to do to stay sane and stay put—but what about me? Is it wrong to do this just because I think someone should? (I am smart enough to be discreet and will apply the campsite rule to his marriage and wife's feelings, etc.) And how can I explain that to the man I married? (We swing anyway! Why not help this guy who is clearly less dangerous and skeezy than anyone we have met swinging or trying to swing?!!?) I have been emailing the other guy but can't decide how to approach this. He knows I am married and that I am not a girlfriend option. But my husband doesn't know anything past our first few exchanges. I can still cut my losses and run, sort of. So, yeah, could you may chime in?
Can A Nice Compromise Exist Really
Sent from the Savage Love App for iPhone
My response—a quick one, 'cuz I'm on vacation—after the jump.
···············
Your husband, for whatever reason, vetoed this guy. Which means you can't fuck him—period, case closed, the end.
Well, you could fuck him, of course, but you shouldn't. Because when you get caught (almost certainly a "when," considering the digital trail you've created), you will have violated your husband's trust to such an extent that he's likely to pull the plug on your swinging adventures. And he's your husband, CANCER, not cancer-stricken-wife guy. Hubby comes first.
Here's something you should do: tell your husband that you've exchanged a few more emails with this guy and that you've thought about fucking him—mission of mercy—but that you won't, and wouldn't, do anything or anyone he wasn't comfortable with. Reassure your husband that you're not bringing this up to revisit the issue of fucking this guy. You just want his okay to provide your new friend, once you've confirmed his story (that could've been his aunt, his sister, his niece, etc., with him in that restaurant), with a little non-sexual online companionship. I'm talking about the odd sympathetic email and a little moral/immoral support to help him gets through the next year. (You can't fuck him, CANCER, but you probably know other people who can, right?) No dirty chats or pics, no wanked-out Skype session. Emails.
Do not fuck the guy, CANCER.
2
Nice reply, but I think LW should continue to try to change her husband's mind. It doesn't sound like there's any bad here and I think the husband is wrong; the couple can totally help.
Also, does cancer-stricken-wife-guy have the blessing of his cancer-stricken-wife to sleep around? That seems pretty frigging important.
Also, does cancer-stricken-wife-guy have the blessing of his cancer-stricken-wife to sleep around? That seems pretty frigging important.
3
" Turns out it's this sweet guy, whom I did share a smile with when I noticed him checking me out, whose wife has cancer—like the kind that really is killing you and nothing is stopping it. (I saw her at the restaurant, she was clearly very ill, so I don't think he's a CPOS.) He says he hasn't had sex in over a year and has another year or so of her illness to "get through" and he misses being touched and, yes, fucking."
That worked really well for Elizabeth Edwards.
That worked really well for Elizabeth Edwards.
4
@3: Zing! Somehow I doubt this guy's gotten the go-ahead. Anyway, Dan told her exactly what to (not) do. There'll be other eye-locking moments for CANCER to take advantage of.
6
Also, stop with the charity angle. You're trying to fuck him because you want to, not out of pity. Looking for the faux-"moral" excuse to cheat on your husband is still cheating on your husband.
7
@ 1 Agreed. Still, having gone through something similar, I kinda understand why he might see it like that - he might need to convince himself that this will stop one day in order to find the strength to go on. Using that as a pick-up line shows very little class, however.
9
>> And I, the formerly-slutty bisexual wife, suggested swinging. It's going well, but slower than I wanted.>>
Here's the thing with "swinging" - there's supposed to be parity. One couple, exchanging with another couple. The problem is that it's fairly rare to get two women to agree that they are each really hot for the other one's husband. I'm guessing the LW's husband is not gorgeous/outgoing enough to charm the other wife very often. So - she could be getting lots of sex, if she weren't slowed down by him. She wants to use this "charity angle" to get some action, but her husband rightly sees that if she's getting some on her own, she'll be less motivated to keep working on getting him some.
Here's the thing with "swinging" - there's supposed to be parity. One couple, exchanging with another couple. The problem is that it's fairly rare to get two women to agree that they are each really hot for the other one's husband. I'm guessing the LW's husband is not gorgeous/outgoing enough to charm the other wife very often. So - she could be getting lots of sex, if she weren't slowed down by him. She wants to use this "charity angle" to get some action, but her husband rightly sees that if she's getting some on her own, she'll be less motivated to keep working on getting him some.
10
Am I a horrible person if I suggest that two years isn't really that long to go without sex? As 1 noted, that line about a year to "get through" strikes a bit of a discordant note. I'm kinda wondering if the whole wounded puppy thing isn't a bit of an act on his part. But I'm kind of jaded and cranky this week.
11
@10 yes, 2 years is a long time to go without sex. Cruel and unusual punishment as far as I'm concerned, in this guys case, punishment handed to him by life, which is often cruel. (just ask his wife). Is he maybe playing up the "wounded puppy" angle a bit to get a hot woman to fuck him? Possibly. Is that so bad, especially after 2 years of abstinence? I would vote no, it isn't.
And nothing wrtong with a week of jaded and cranky. BT, DT.
And nothing wrtong with a week of jaded and cranky. BT, DT.
13
Cheating is cheating, CANCER, even if with the most noble of intentions. You can't get this guy off, but by all means try to find someone who can.
To everyone else: don't knock pity fucking until you've tried it. IMO, throwing someone a pity fuck really is doing god's work. The main downside is the possibility of the pity fuckee trying to upgrade, which does not seem to be an issue here.
To everyone else: don't knock pity fucking until you've tried it. IMO, throwing someone a pity fuck really is doing god's work. The main downside is the possibility of the pity fuckee trying to upgrade, which does not seem to be an issue here.
14
I'm sure there's multitude of physiological reasons barring this, but if anyone deserves a pity fuck, it's the wife with cancer.
16
@9 - I think it's more likely that the husband isn't that into swinging but does it to be GGG for his wife.
I know there are poly couples out there that make it work - I suppose it's the nature of Dan's job that the letters he gets are from people where it isn't working, but damn, it really doesn't help the cause of poly acceptance to read letter after letter from selfish spouses looking for external validation to do something their partner has specifically said is not ok. CANCER has gotten her hubby to swing, but not enough for her. She does not respect the limitation he has put out there - not to sleep with THIS guy - to the point that she's already keeping secrets. To be honest, I don't think she should even keep in touch with the guy at all, because I don't believe she would be able to maintain boundaries, now that he's got the shine of the forbidden on top of the pity fuck thrill. And as someone upthread said, she needs to accept that this isn't about charity to the guy; it's all about what she wants.
I know there are poly couples out there that make it work - I suppose it's the nature of Dan's job that the letters he gets are from people where it isn't working, but damn, it really doesn't help the cause of poly acceptance to read letter after letter from selfish spouses looking for external validation to do something their partner has specifically said is not ok. CANCER has gotten her hubby to swing, but not enough for her. She does not respect the limitation he has put out there - not to sleep with THIS guy - to the point that she's already keeping secrets. To be honest, I don't think she should even keep in touch with the guy at all, because I don't believe she would be able to maintain boundaries, now that he's got the shine of the forbidden on top of the pity fuck thrill. And as someone upthread said, she needs to accept that this isn't about charity to the guy; it's all about what she wants.
17
Definitely agree with Dan: do not have sex with this guy, period. If only because your husband said no, even as he's said yes to other opportunities. But also because either you, or the guy in question, or both of you, are being horribly weird and insensitive about the wife with cancer. He has a year to "get through"? What?! You imagine he's not a CPOS just because the wife is really sick, but not because you have evidence that she gives her blessing to this extramarital union. You clearly want to be this guy's savior, so you can feel noble while getting a piece on the side without your husband's involvement. You're already exaggerating how much he "needs" you--for "intimacy", supposedly, even though his wife is still alive. He just needs you for getting laid.
And what's wrong with him, or his relationship, besides the cancer? For instance, has he explained why his wife can't even "touch" him, although she's apparently physically capable of trips to restaurants? This situation seems ripe to devolve into a messy entanglement with a man you enjoy being needed by, and about whom you're already willing to deceive your spouse. Maybe your husband clearly sees that, and that's why he vetoes this one!
And what's wrong with him, or his relationship, besides the cancer? For instance, has he explained why his wife can't even "touch" him, although she's apparently physically capable of trips to restaurants? This situation seems ripe to devolve into a messy entanglement with a man you enjoy being needed by, and about whom you're already willing to deceive your spouse. Maybe your husband clearly sees that, and that's why he vetoes this one!
18
16: "To be honest, I don't think she should even keep in touch with the guy at all, because I don't believe she would be able to maintain boundaries, now that he's got the shine of the forbidden on top of the pity fuck thrill."
I totally agree. Keeping in touch will just get her emotionally entangled with this guy, and then it won't be about swinging anymore.
I totally agree. Keeping in touch will just get her emotionally entangled with this guy, and then it won't be about swinging anymore.
20
My advice would be that it depends why he vetoed it. Is it because he's worried that cancerguy's wife isn't a fully-consenting party to the arrangement? If so, he's unlikely to change his mind. But, if he's just jealous of you getting some without him getting some? Maybe you can turn the discussion to finding a randomwoman for him to "swing" with while you're "swinging" with cancerguy. Yeah cancerguy and randomwoman aren't married, but it's still more of a tit-for-tat arrangement.
I wouldn't push hard on him, but at least find out why he's saying no.
I wouldn't push hard on him, but at least find out why he's saying no.
21
I'd bet Dan gets some(plenty) of letters from non-monogamists that are happy and well adjusted and those are mostly, meh, as far as comment/interest goes... So we get more of teh people who struggle w/ it.
Not that struggling w/ it is more representative, just that it has a more human interest aspect, maybe?
Not that struggling w/ it is more representative, just that it has a more human interest aspect, maybe?
22
I have a lot of experience with watching people die of cancer, and there is something really fishy about this story.
The only way the wife looks sick with cancer (to a casual observer) is if she's currently going through serious chemo or if she has weeks to live.
The one year sick, one year left claim is similarly bizarre. That is a serious illness if it never went into remission, and I can't see where the guy is getting that one year estimate.
The most likely explanation to me is that the wife is currently battling cancer, with an unknown as yet prognosis, and the husband is claiming she may die soon (but not too soon) as a way to get his dick wet.
Alternatively, the letter writer made the whole thing up, possibly to get Dan's permission to go over the head of her partner if he objects to some guy she wants to fuck.
I mean, what are the odds that she would see a missed connection about her?
The only way the wife looks sick with cancer (to a casual observer) is if she's currently going through serious chemo or if she has weeks to live.
The one year sick, one year left claim is similarly bizarre. That is a serious illness if it never went into remission, and I can't see where the guy is getting that one year estimate.
The most likely explanation to me is that the wife is currently battling cancer, with an unknown as yet prognosis, and the husband is claiming she may die soon (but not too soon) as a way to get his dick wet.
Alternatively, the letter writer made the whole thing up, possibly to get Dan's permission to go over the head of her partner if he objects to some guy she wants to fuck.
I mean, what are the odds that she would see a missed connection about her?
23
@10, 11: I think it depends entirely on the situation. Especially on how much direct, hands-on caregiving is being provided by the "sex-deprived" partner (remember, both the ill person and the partner are sex-deprived, and we are sexual beings from birth to death, through illness and pain). Maybe the partner is only the taxi to the oncologist or whatever because that's all they know how to do, but they're emotionally available. Maybe they're in deep denial and completely shut down. Maybe they're coping with caregiving tasks but physically ragged out (lack of good sleep, etc.). I know I lost pretty much all sexual interest when I was in a caregiving role for 2+ years (my mom, so it obviously had nothing to do with her). I wasn't involved with anybody personally during that time, so that kept it simple. Even if I had spare time and went to look at porn or read erotica, it didn't really appeal or arouse. Maybe every few months I'd beat my meat fairly savagely on the spur of the moment, more to keep the pipes clean than anything else.
Bottom line: every situation's a little different. People need to not judge, go easy on themselves, and for god's sake reach out to other people for sympathy, advice, respite time, and SOCIAL relief. Sex if it's not forced, painful, furtive, rushed, or done without full knowledge and acquiescence (preferably discussed at least preliminarily as a "what-if" long before the actual situation arises).
Bottom line: every situation's a little different. People need to not judge, go easy on themselves, and for god's sake reach out to other people for sympathy, advice, respite time, and SOCIAL relief. Sex if it's not forced, painful, furtive, rushed, or done without full knowledge and acquiescence (preferably discussed at least preliminarily as a "what-if" long before the actual situation arises).
26
Rob!, that's a very helpful and touching story. My condolences.
I have a feeling that wife-has-cancer guy is not like you, however.
"He says he hasn't had sex in over a year and has another year or so of her illness to "get through" and he misses being touched and, yes, fucking."
I bet the LW is mad as hell that Dan didn't tell her what she wanted to hear, even after all the careful spinning.
I have a feeling that wife-has-cancer guy is not like you, however.
"He says he hasn't had sex in over a year and has another year or so of her illness to "get through" and he misses being touched and, yes, fucking."
I bet the LW is mad as hell that Dan didn't tell her what she wanted to hear, even after all the careful spinning.
27
All kinds of red flags here--the LW appears to be massaging the story to get the answer she wants. She sucks up to Dan, she spins cancer-husband's dubious story, she's conveniently vague about whether cancer-hubby has his wife's okay to seek relief but she's certain that Dan would approve regardless, and on and on.
So I'm with 26--I bet she's pissed that Dan told her no when she worked so hard to get him to say yes.
So I'm with 26--I bet she's pissed that Dan told her no when she worked so hard to get him to say yes.
28
Thanks for kind words, Sandiai. It's been a few years now.
Yes, I really was targeting my comment at 10 & 11's batting around the two-years-without-sex idea.
Otherwise, despite what I said about judging (I meant mainly self-flagellation), I go along with most of you that LW is being manipulative and Cancer Hubby is tone-deaf at minimum... open to persuasion if LW or Cancer Hubby decide to come aboard with more details and/or exculpatory evidence.
Yes, I really was targeting my comment at 10 & 11's batting around the two-years-without-sex idea.
Otherwise, despite what I said about judging (I meant mainly self-flagellation), I go along with most of you that LW is being manipulative and Cancer Hubby is tone-deaf at minimum... open to persuasion if LW or Cancer Hubby decide to come aboard with more details and/or exculpatory evidence.
29
If she wants to do a good deed she should try and get this guy hooked up with someone but not herself. As Dan said, this guy was veto'ed. That is that.
30
Read "Komt een vrouw bij de dokter" by Kluun (is it "Love life" in English?) for maybe getting a perspective on cancer guy. The book is about a selfish CPOS who's married to a woman dying of cancer. The book managed to make me impatient with him fucking around and at the same time understand that he needs that to be able to support his wife through her suffering.
That doesn't mean I think that CANCER should be the one he cheats his wife with.
That doesn't mean I think that CANCER should be the one he cheats his wife with.
31
I was always under the impression that "swinging" was a unique sexual practice, allowing a (married) couple the opportunity to switch partners with another couple ... like a mutually beneficial fuckbuddy thing. Though the initial contact is for sex, couples can - if they click - socialize with other compatible couples. Summary: 2 people switch partners with 2 people.
But that's not good enough for the LW. First of all, she's not getting enough opportunities for sex in the current arrangement. So she finds a worthy recipient of her sexual generosity. Wow, like she's the patron saint for married men whose wives are terminally ill. It's no wonder that her husband sees the Danger, Will Robinson flashing lights and is not allowing her to stretch the parameters of their extramarital adventures. It's one thing to have extra sex for fun or kicks (as a couple). It's a far different thing to be getting closer to a man whose wife is dying. That has all the potential of becoming a very messy, emotional mess, especially when the wife dies. Does the LW think she'll be able to simply pack up and leave the new widower.
If all she's after is more sex (with strangers), then it's up to her to renegotiate the frequency with her husband for their joint trysts. Otherwise, it's no longer the original agreement.
But that's not good enough for the LW. First of all, she's not getting enough opportunities for sex in the current arrangement. So she finds a worthy recipient of her sexual generosity. Wow, like she's the patron saint for married men whose wives are terminally ill. It's no wonder that her husband sees the Danger, Will Robinson flashing lights and is not allowing her to stretch the parameters of their extramarital adventures. It's one thing to have extra sex for fun or kicks (as a couple). It's a far different thing to be getting closer to a man whose wife is dying. That has all the potential of becoming a very messy, emotional mess, especially when the wife dies. Does the LW think she'll be able to simply pack up and leave the new widower.
If all she's after is more sex (with strangers), then it's up to her to renegotiate the frequency with her husband for their joint trysts. Otherwise, it's no longer the original agreement.
32
For the sake of playing Devil's Advocate (I personally agree with Dan's advice and the general bent of the comments so far), a lot of weight is being given to the "another year or so to get through" comment. In its current context it's easy to jump on as horribly insensitive, but anyone who's watched a loved one die of cancer can understand that it's an incredibly painful and emotionally draining experience. It's very common for people to feel relief when their loved one's illness and suffering are finished. The one who remains still faces a long sad road of grief, but they can begin the process of healing and regain a more normal and peaceful existence. Perhaps that's more along the lines of what Cancer Hubby meant ...
As for CANCER herself, GGG does not stand for Greedy, (un)Grateful, and Gullible.
As for CANCER herself, GGG does not stand for Greedy, (un)Grateful, and Gullible.
33
OH MY GOD don't have sex without your husband's blessing! That would be cheating! CHEATING, I say!!
34
On Being a Sacred Whore
I spent most of my adolecence and adulthood as a profoundly obese, terribly sexually frustrated and lonely individual. Weight loss surgery, plastic surgery and lots of time in the gym and competing in a sport that I fell in love with changed that.
Since then, I've had a number of sexual encounters with people who were hyper-heavy, old, or physically unattractive. The experiences turned out to be really good. There was a wonderful sense of human connection, the sex was surprisingly hot and they were grateful to have been treated like real human beings. Talk about unexpectedly healing experiences. Wow.
Back to the original story. There is an extremely strong cultural bias against partners of seriously ill people who need physical and sexual contact with others. I think that demanding sexual monogamy under these circumstances is horribly puritanical and cruel. My advice to the woman in this column is: You feel a sense of connection with a very needy person. You want to help. That does you credit. I think you need to have a very earnest and assertive talk with your husband about why this is important.
Good luck.
I spent most of my adolecence and adulthood as a profoundly obese, terribly sexually frustrated and lonely individual. Weight loss surgery, plastic surgery and lots of time in the gym and competing in a sport that I fell in love with changed that.
Since then, I've had a number of sexual encounters with people who were hyper-heavy, old, or physically unattractive. The experiences turned out to be really good. There was a wonderful sense of human connection, the sex was surprisingly hot and they were grateful to have been treated like real human beings. Talk about unexpectedly healing experiences. Wow.
Back to the original story. There is an extremely strong cultural bias against partners of seriously ill people who need physical and sexual contact with others. I think that demanding sexual monogamy under these circumstances is horribly puritanical and cruel. My advice to the woman in this column is: You feel a sense of connection with a very needy person. You want to help. That does you credit. I think you need to have a very earnest and assertive talk with your husband about why this is important.
Good luck.
35
I spent most of my adolecence and adulthood as a profoundly obese, terribly sexually frustrated and lonely individual. Weight loss surgery, plastic surgery and lots of time in the gym and competing in a sport that I fell in love with changed that.
Since then, I've had a number of sexual encounters with people who were hyper-heavy, old, or physically unattractive. The experiences turned out to be really good. There was a wonderful sense of human connection, the sex was surprisingly hot and they were grateful to have been treated like real human beings. Talk about unexpectedly healing experiences. Wow.
Back to the original story. There is an extremely strong cultural bias against partners of seriously ill people who need physical and sexual contact with others. I think that demanding sexual monogamy under these circumstances is horribly puritanical and cruel. My advice to the woman in this column is: You feel a sense of connection with a very needy person. You want to help. That does you credit. I think you need to have a very earnest and assertive talk with your husband about why this is important.
Good luck.
PS an alternate explanation for cancer hubby's 'I've got another year of living this' rather than 'my wife might have another year of life' could be simply nerves.
I spent most of my adolecence and adulthood as a profoundly obese, terribly sexually frustrated and lonely individual. Weight loss surgery, plastic surgery and lots of time in the gym and competing in a sport that I fell in love with changed that.
Since then, I've had a number of sexual encounters with people who were hyper-heavy, old, or physically unattractive. The experiences turned out to be really good. There was a wonderful sense of human connection, the sex was surprisingly hot and they were grateful to have been treated like real human beings. Talk about unexpectedly healing experiences. Wow.
Back to the original story. There is an extremely strong cultural bias against partners of seriously ill people who need physical and sexual contact with others. I think that demanding sexual monogamy under these circumstances is horribly puritanical and cruel. My advice to the woman in this column is: You feel a sense of connection with a very needy person. You want to help. That does you credit. I think you need to have a very earnest and assertive talk with your husband about why this is important.
Good luck.
PS an alternate explanation for cancer hubby's 'I've got another year of living this' rather than 'my wife might have another year of life' could be simply nerves.
36
Sex is in the mind. It doesn't matter if the terminally ill woman is physically fit enough to get to a restaurant and back. She may well have an emotional state that prevents her from dealing with sex. We don't have the details of why she is mobile and yet isn't having sex of any kind with her husband (if that's even true).
Women: You can find a man to fuck pretty much anywhere. We are standing by to assist you 24/7. Stop writing to Dan about how you just have to fuck this one guy. You don't.
Women: You can find a man to fuck pretty much anywhere. We are standing by to assist you 24/7. Stop writing to Dan about how you just have to fuck this one guy. You don't.
37
In cults the members have to get permission from the cult leader for sexual encounters.
you girls should really look at your lives......
you girls should really look at your lives......
38
@16 I'd go with that. Not that a few paragraphs is much to base much of anything on, but I get the impression that husband's doing his best with this for CANCER, and CANCER wants to be racing on ahead. If so, perhaps give hubby a little extra credit for his efforts, CANCER?
40
Wow. I totally missed the husband's veto in my first read-through. This woman CLEARLY wants you to okay this slumber party, Dan, and thank you for not letting her get away with that kind of bullshit.
41
A year to live for the cancer stricken wife? I call bullshit. The wife is probably going through cancer treatment and is currently too sick to have a sex drive. The husband is a CPOS.
42
The situation boils down to a couple who opened up their relationship to swinging, "as a couple." She was on CL looking for a guy with a cute girlfriend, and found this guy instead. Now she wants to change the arrangement from something they do as a couple, to something she does on her own, so her husband's veto is totally understandable at this point. She is trying to use the cancer as a reason to override the veto - which is BS (as everyone here has correctly pointed out!).
What she should do is step back - keep swinging in a way that makes her husband feel secure in their relationship, and maybe in a year or so when he is more comfortable with it he *may* be open to the idea of going off on solo missions. Then if she still has that special vocation to fuck guys with dying wives, it is a win-win!
What she should do is step back - keep swinging in a way that makes her husband feel secure in their relationship, and maybe in a year or so when he is more comfortable with it he *may* be open to the idea of going off on solo missions. Then if she still has that special vocation to fuck guys with dying wives, it is a win-win!
43
Cancer should follow her husband's veto, at least if she wants their marriage to survive.
In the care-giving husband's defense, Â care giving for someone who is sick and dying frequently becomes something to just "get through". Â
This guy could be my Dad,  and if he is my dad I hope he makes a connection with someone.  My mother's had one year to live for the past 6,  and it long ago became something we're all just trying to get through,  despite the fact she is frequently relatively active and happy in her power wheelchair and we all love her. Â
We do not endure her life, but we do endure her illness and slow death:  sleepless nights and hours in the ER thinking "this is it" every few months, or sometimes  every couple weeks, the bad days when she is too I'll to go out, the pressure sores and infections and sponge baths and everything else that house along with loving and caring for someone sick and "dying".
So, Â don't be too hard on this guy, Â if he has a dying wife who looks sick he may have a lot to "get through".
In the care-giving husband's defense, Â care giving for someone who is sick and dying frequently becomes something to just "get through". Â
This guy could be my Dad,  and if he is my dad I hope he makes a connection with someone.  My mother's had one year to live for the past 6,  and it long ago became something we're all just trying to get through,  despite the fact she is frequently relatively active and happy in her power wheelchair and we all love her. Â
We do not endure her life, but we do endure her illness and slow death:  sleepless nights and hours in the ER thinking "this is it" every few months, or sometimes  every couple weeks, the bad days when she is too I'll to go out, the pressure sores and infections and sponge baths and everything else that house along with loving and caring for someone sick and "dying".
So, Â don't be too hard on this guy, Â if he has a dying wife who looks sick he may have a lot to "get through".
44
I think the letter-writer might have shot herself in the foot by explaining how sorry she was for the guy, how nice he was etc. That could have sounded like an emotional connection, which the husband found threatening.
45
@36 Really? REALLY?
It's good to know there is always some skanky sore covered penis waiting around for me, that's what I really want.
If women just wanted some cock inside them, they'd get a dildo. Finding someone you actually want to fuck who's willing to fuck you is just as difficult for women as it is for men. Keep your sexist bullshit to yourself.
It's good to know there is always some skanky sore covered penis waiting around for me, that's what I really want.
If women just wanted some cock inside them, they'd get a dildo. Finding someone you actually want to fuck who's willing to fuck you is just as difficult for women as it is for men. Keep your sexist bullshit to yourself.
46
@45 Caralain
You are the one who is sexist. Is that really how you perceive most of the men around you?
Where did I say that there was any difference between the sexes in finding eligible partners? All I said was that there is an abundance of men around who are interested in sex, which is all this woman is looking for, right? We're talking about pity-fucking not romance.
You are the one who is sexist. Is that really how you perceive most of the men around you?
Where did I say that there was any difference between the sexes in finding eligible partners? All I said was that there is an abundance of men around who are interested in sex, which is all this woman is looking for, right? We're talking about pity-fucking not romance.
47
Hi all,
It is always difficult to leave things at their face in stories like CANCER's. Pity for the sick wife, scorn for her husband, is almost knee-jerk. But the tidbit about lack of touching makes me wonder if the lack of sex isn't from his side. I know that different cancers (diseases) interfere with a person's life in many possible ways, even at different points in their course. In the instances where people I've known who fought cancer, being touched never seemed an issue.
I would amend someone's call for professional help for the grieving husband to a his and her massage from someone trained/skilled in dealing with the needs of the severely ill.
Peace.
It is always difficult to leave things at their face in stories like CANCER's. Pity for the sick wife, scorn for her husband, is almost knee-jerk. But the tidbit about lack of touching makes me wonder if the lack of sex isn't from his side. I know that different cancers (diseases) interfere with a person's life in many possible ways, even at different points in their course. In the instances where people I've known who fought cancer, being touched never seemed an issue.
I would amend someone's call for professional help for the grieving husband to a his and her massage from someone trained/skilled in dealing with the needs of the severely ill.
Peace.
48
Well, indeed, it is of course all about what CANCER wants sexually, right?
Her options:
(a) keep her marriage going as it has gone before (apparently a little frustrating);
(b) have a talk with hubby about changing things (say, about fucking cancer-stricken-wife guy, or someone else), ready to negotiate on hubby's insecurities should there be any;
(c) have one (and possibly other) adulterous affair(s) (the CPOS option);
(d) terminate the relationship with hubby (and then cancer-stricken-wife guy and other possibilities).
That's the point -- she should choose what she wants to do based on the cost-benefit analysis of every option. Oh, I am sure that cancer-stricken-wife guy's plight (assuming his situation is indeed as he describes) does deserve to be fucked, and I can see how it would feel morally good for her to fuck him (I'm not mocking her -- I honestly think I can see this side of the equation). But then again, if helping were everything, she could, as others suggest, just get someone else to fuck him. Which is what she would do if she found him totally unattractive but still wanted to be a good Samaritan, right?
So, the above are CANCER's options. She should think about each carefully, and decide. After all, she's the one who knows herself (how important are these nights of debauchery? -- if they are really very important for her as a person, then she should fight for them) and her husband (why the veto? what is he afraid of? and is there some chance he is right in being afraid of that?).
Personally, and without knowing either CANCER, her husband, and cancer-stricken-wife guy I would like for (b) to work -- because I have a little fetish both for wives having lovers, and for spouses being sincere to each other about their sex lives and needs. Also, like Dan, I am a little bit conservative, so I wouldn't want (d) -- end the relationship with hubby -- if there is any chance to keep their marriage working. Marriages are, all in all, good things.
But I don't know the details, so it's up to CANCER.
More...
Her options:
(a) keep her marriage going as it has gone before (apparently a little frustrating);
(b) have a talk with hubby about changing things (say, about fucking cancer-stricken-wife guy, or someone else), ready to negotiate on hubby's insecurities should there be any;
(c) have one (and possibly other) adulterous affair(s) (the CPOS option);
(d) terminate the relationship with hubby (and then cancer-stricken-wife guy and other possibilities).
That's the point -- she should choose what she wants to do based on the cost-benefit analysis of every option. Oh, I am sure that cancer-stricken-wife guy's plight (assuming his situation is indeed as he describes) does deserve to be fucked, and I can see how it would feel morally good for her to fuck him (I'm not mocking her -- I honestly think I can see this side of the equation). But then again, if helping were everything, she could, as others suggest, just get someone else to fuck him. Which is what she would do if she found him totally unattractive but still wanted to be a good Samaritan, right?
So, the above are CANCER's options. She should think about each carefully, and decide. After all, she's the one who knows herself (how important are these nights of debauchery? -- if they are really very important for her as a person, then she should fight for them) and her husband (why the veto? what is he afraid of? and is there some chance he is right in being afraid of that?).
Personally, and without knowing either CANCER, her husband, and cancer-stricken-wife guy I would like for (b) to work -- because I have a little fetish both for wives having lovers, and for spouses being sincere to each other about their sex lives and needs. Also, like Dan, I am a little bit conservative, so I wouldn't want (d) -- end the relationship with hubby -- if there is any chance to keep their marriage working. Marriages are, all in all, good things.
But I don't know the details, so it's up to CANCER.
49
CANCER is being an asshole.
I agree with the consensus here: she shouldn't fuck the guy, she should respect her husband's veto if she cares about her marriage, it's doubtful that Sad Cancer Husband has any more license than John Edwards did (well put, #3), she shouldn't maintain a relationship with this guy because she's already demonstrating poor boundary management, and her weaseling about being an angel of mercy rings really false (#24 is right, gift him a professional). She also really needs to stop and seriously consider her own motivations here. Why is fucking this particular guy so important to her? Because I'm willing to bet the price of a complimentary call girl that it has more to do with her narcissism and frustration with her sex life than it does with any kind of honest charity. If she's hoping to eventually get a license to fly solo this is not the way to do it.
@33: I bet your partner doesn't know you're such a big fan of cheating, I bet you wouldn't want them to know, and I bet you're counting on them not being an equally big fan of cheating. But wouldn't it be great if they were!
I agree with the consensus here: she shouldn't fuck the guy, she should respect her husband's veto if she cares about her marriage, it's doubtful that Sad Cancer Husband has any more license than John Edwards did (well put, #3), she shouldn't maintain a relationship with this guy because she's already demonstrating poor boundary management, and her weaseling about being an angel of mercy rings really false (#24 is right, gift him a professional). She also really needs to stop and seriously consider her own motivations here. Why is fucking this particular guy so important to her? Because I'm willing to bet the price of a complimentary call girl that it has more to do with her narcissism and frustration with her sex life than it does with any kind of honest charity. If she's hoping to eventually get a license to fly solo this is not the way to do it.
@33: I bet your partner doesn't know you're such a big fan of cheating, I bet you wouldn't want them to know, and I bet you're counting on them not being an equally big fan of cheating. But wouldn't it be great if they were!
50
@46 etc...I don't know why guys get this notion that all women can just snap their fingers and have a long line of fuck buddies or whatever instantly appear. It really doesn't work like that. I can tell you my perception is that men get a lot more action because they really go out and drum it up -- which you probably find equally laughable.
Once I exclude married men/cheaters, gay men, one night stands, and assholes (I really prefer to at least *like* the person I'm fucking, doesn't have to be romance, but respect is good) and hit my general age range (say +- 10 yrs)... the pickings are mighty slim.
Once I exclude married men/cheaters, gay men, one night stands, and assholes (I really prefer to at least *like* the person I'm fucking, doesn't have to be romance, but respect is good) and hit my general age range (say +- 10 yrs)... the pickings are mighty slim.
51
Let's not equate every cancer-spouse who "does what they need to do to stay sane" with John Edwards. He was making videos, making promises, and making a baby with his bit on the side. That is exactly the WRONG way to go about it.
52
@51: Agree. I'm sympathetic to the cancer spouses who spend every waking moment of every day trying to make their spouse comfortable during the slide toward the inevitable. And to those spouses, I give a "cheating" pass so that they can stay sane and go back to soul-destroying, 24/7 job of caring for their sick spouse.
But that wasn't John Edwards. He wasn't caring for Elizabeth; he was running for President. So he doesn't get my sympathy for engaging in the thankless task of caring for a sick spouse. And he doesn't get a pass on infidelity, because he doesn't need to stay sane so that he can go back to that thankless task.
But that wasn't John Edwards. He wasn't caring for Elizabeth; he was running for President. So he doesn't get my sympathy for engaging in the thankless task of caring for a sick spouse. And he doesn't get a pass on infidelity, because he doesn't need to stay sane so that he can go back to that thankless task.
53
@50 BEG
Actually, it's @45 that's making assertions about the comparative ease of one sex versus another, not me. I say that for all heterosexual people there is an enormous pool of eligible sexual partners if sex is all you want. CANCER is just looking for a hook up, not a relationship.
It's mystifying to me that people who are already getting regular sex at home (and outside the home) get so hung up on fucking one particular person that they have to write to Dan for advice on how to make it happen. Go find someone else. Jeez.
Actually, it's @45 that's making assertions about the comparative ease of one sex versus another, not me. I say that for all heterosexual people there is an enormous pool of eligible sexual partners if sex is all you want. CANCER is just looking for a hook up, not a relationship.
It's mystifying to me that people who are already getting regular sex at home (and outside the home) get so hung up on fucking one particular person that they have to write to Dan for advice on how to make it happen. Go find someone else. Jeez.
54
Quoth @50:
I completely agree that there is a shortage of quality people on both sides of the gender divide. The difference is in the threshold: again speaking generally, men don't have many standards when it comes to women they're willing to fuck. Women do. That's why women have an easier time finding NSA sex than men-- because the available pool of men willing to fuck any particular woman is generally much larger than the available pool of women willing to fuck any particular man.
Once I exclude married men/cheaters, gay men, one night stands, and assholes (I really prefer to at least *like* the person I'm fucking, doesn't have to be romance, but respect is good) and hit my general age range (say +- 10 yrs)... the pickings are mighty slim.If you're excluding one-night stands, you've severely limited your fuckbuddy options. Speaking generally, men are not so picky.
I completely agree that there is a shortage of quality people on both sides of the gender divide. The difference is in the threshold: again speaking generally, men don't have many standards when it comes to women they're willing to fuck. Women do. That's why women have an easier time finding NSA sex than men-- because the available pool of men willing to fuck any particular woman is generally much larger than the available pool of women willing to fuck any particular man.
55
"@46 etc...I don't know why guys get this notion that all women can just snap their fingers and have a long line of fuck buddies or whatever instantly appear. It really doesn't work like that."
"Once I exclude married men/cheaters, gay men, one night stands, and assholes (I really prefer to at least *like* the person I'm fucking, doesn't have to be romance, but respect is good) and hit my general age range (say +- 10 yrs)... the pickings are mighty slim."
In other words, once you start applying all your subjective filters, that long line of fuck buddies that would be there for your Craiglist posting becomes much shorter. Because, lady, if you do a Craiglist posting saying, "Woman looking for NSA fuck buddy. Apply by lining up at 456 Hardwood Lane, 9 pm. Sexing of acceptable candiate by 10:30 pm.", lady, trust me, you will get a line.
Contrast that with men, who would not have a single gal show up in response to that same posting for female NSA sex. i.e., no long line to start applying filters to in response to a Craiglist posting.
What you are really saying is that you are so choosy, the guys who do show up will not interest you, not that you cannot get responses.
"Once I exclude married men/cheaters, gay men, one night stands, and assholes (I really prefer to at least *like* the person I'm fucking, doesn't have to be romance, but respect is good) and hit my general age range (say +- 10 yrs)... the pickings are mighty slim."
In other words, once you start applying all your subjective filters, that long line of fuck buddies that would be there for your Craiglist posting becomes much shorter. Because, lady, if you do a Craiglist posting saying, "Woman looking for NSA fuck buddy. Apply by lining up at 456 Hardwood Lane, 9 pm. Sexing of acceptable candiate by 10:30 pm.", lady, trust me, you will get a line.
Contrast that with men, who would not have a single gal show up in response to that same posting for female NSA sex. i.e., no long line to start applying filters to in response to a Craiglist posting.
What you are really saying is that you are so choosy, the guys who do show up will not interest you, not that you cannot get responses.
56
"I, the formerly-slutty bisexual wife, suggested swinging. It's going well, but slower than I wanted."
This, combined with her single-minded desire to fuck cancer-husband, suggests that she is ready to have sex outside her marriage - without her husband's participation - but her husband isn't. She's trying to wrangle more sexual freedom out of him by using poor, sweet cancer-husband as the perfect excuse: she just wants to do a good deed!
She definitely shouldn't fuck cancer-husband because 1) his story is suspicious and 2) her husband has already vetoed it. I'd take Dan's advice a step further: she should talk to her husband about whether he is (or ever will be) okay with her having sex with other people without him there. If yes, they can start figuring that out. If no, then it's time for that boundary to be explicitly laid out, before she comes up with another flimsy excuse to strike out on her own.
This, combined with her single-minded desire to fuck cancer-husband, suggests that she is ready to have sex outside her marriage - without her husband's participation - but her husband isn't. She's trying to wrangle more sexual freedom out of him by using poor, sweet cancer-husband as the perfect excuse: she just wants to do a good deed!
She definitely shouldn't fuck cancer-husband because 1) his story is suspicious and 2) her husband has already vetoed it. I'd take Dan's advice a step further: she should talk to her husband about whether he is (or ever will be) okay with her having sex with other people without him there. If yes, they can start figuring that out. If no, then it's time for that boundary to be explicitly laid out, before she comes up with another flimsy excuse to strike out on her own.
57
I give this marriage one more year, tops, before the letter writer gets bored and decides to do whatever the hell she wants regardless of her husband's feelings.
58
I agree with 18. Continuing to email back and forth with this guys seems like a slippery slope. He presumably has other people in his life who can support him emotionally, and if CANCER isn't going to fuck him -- which is what he was originally interested in -- she should leave him alone rather than risk leading him on during a vulnerable period of his life.
59
@46: I'm a woman, and I agree with you. Although I know that YOU are not asserting that there's any difference between the sexes in finding eligible partners, I am comfortable asserting that. Well, maybe not asserting that it's easier to find the partners, but definitely asserting that it's easier to get a man into the sack quickly than a woman. I'm bi, I've tried both fields- unless straight women are significantly more interested in one-night stands and NSA arrangements than lesbians and bi chicks, I would say that it's much more difficult to find a woman who will agree to have casual sex than it is to find a man who will agree to the same.
60
My mother is dying of cancer, and it's hard for me to imagine my father, between flying with her a state away for treatments, working his ass off to keep his insurance and pay for all the bills, and caring for a dying person, finding the time for a random fuck. He's 43 and attractive; it's not like he couldn't get someone else to have sex with him if he wanted to (I very, very much doubt that he would cheat even if circumstances were happier).Man, what the fuck is wrong with our society? We honestly care so little about the feelings of our DYING WIVES that we think we can just so stick it in someone else's pussy because "oh, sorry honey, your gaunt emaciated form just doesn't do it for me." Look, I just fucked a (young, attractive, hung) man who most certainly is not my boyfriend six days ago: but MY BOYFRIEND ISN'T DYING OF CANCER. For God's sake.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
It's Spring! Who's Ready for Street Harassment? by Cienna Madrid
-
SL Letter of the Day: Insane Demands by Dan Savage
-
SL Letters of the Day: Just Say No to DSGs by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Gonna Boil My Laptop After Answering This One by Dan Savage
-
Bigot Florist Files Countersuit by Dominic Holden
-
New Gun Enthusiast... by Dan Savage
-
America Doesn't Care About Black People by Charles Mudede
-
"Bus service shouldn't be optional—it should be a right." by Cienna Madrid
-
US Military Grants Itself the Power to Police American Streets and "Quell" "Civil Disturbances" by Brendan Kiley
-
Fucking NBA Rejects Kings Move to Seattle by Goldy
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (60) RSS