Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Monday, January 9, 2012

SL Letter of the Day: Threeway of Love

Posted by on Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Thanks for the column this week about monogamish couples! It came at a great time in my sex life, since just this weekend this 24-year-old straight girl got picked up at a bar by a VERY hot couple for my first-ever threeway! It was my first-ever experience with a woman. It was fun, but it confirmed for me that I'm not really into the ladies. But I should mention that after the three of us did our thing, he and I jumped in the shower, she fell asleep, and then he drove me home and spent the rest of the night with me. I'm getting the feeling that he has a bit of a crush on me, but his GF was only mildly miffed that he slept in my bed. (For me, that would have been a huge breach of intimacy, but hey, not complaining!) He and I are in contact, calling and texting, she and I not so much. I would really, really enjoy it if he would get her permission to spend more time with me one-on-one. I'm not really interested in more lady time. But he's very concerned about his relationship. It's pretty new and he's crazy about her. What's the best way to broach the subject? To give you a little idea of what I'm talking about and to help you understand why I want this to work out so badly, I'm attaching the picture he left on my phone while I was in the bathroom. Enjoy!

Don't Want To Be A Third

My response, the attached pic, and a bonus threeway question... all after the jump.

····················

This guy isn't acting like he's crazy about his newish girlfriend, DWTBAT. In fact, this guy—this guy with the amazing butt—is acting like one of those people who give threeways and other forms of monogamishamy a bad name. Leaving his sleeping girlfriend alone to go and spend the night with the girl they picked up together in a bar? Calling and texting that girl without (presumably) his girlfriend's knowledge or okay? That's the kind of thoughtless, selfish behavior can lead to a breakup, DWTBAT, and when it does it's the threeway that gets the blame and not the person(s) who were behaving thoughtlessly and selfishly.

But that wasn't your question.

You broach the subject, DWTBAT, with a clear and unambiguous text message: "Had a great time the night we messed around. I think you're so great and really sexy. But what I learned about myself that night was that girl-on-girl action just isn't for me. But I'd like to mess around with your hot boyfriend some more, on my own, but only if that's okay with you."

And, yes, that's a text you send to her, DWTBAT, not him. Who knows? Maybe everything he's doing is okay with her—if she didn't mind his disappearing with you while she was asleep, I can't imagine she'll mind him messing around with you some more—but you gotta do your screw diligence.

Now here's the pic...

buttthreesllotd.jpg

And here's the bonus threeway question...

We hear a lot about how to negotiate threesomes when you’re in a relationship, but what about the other side: the “guest?” I am a gay man in my 20s and recently befriended a gay couple who asked me to join them in a threesome. I did, it was awesome, and we are still friends. However, I can’t help but feel like the power to control when (or if) we get it on again is in their hands. I would really like to do it with them again, or even on a semi-regular basis, but don’t know how to broach the subject. I understand that they may have just wanted to do it the one time, and that is fine. They are becoming good friends and I don't want to jeopardize that by making them feel awkward and bringing up what was in there mind a one off. Even still – what is proper etiquette for a threesome “guest” to try and get invited back?

Thanks Again

It might feel like the power is all in their hands, TA, but the power is equally distributed. They had the power to invite you into their bed; you had the power to say no. You have the power to ask to get it on with them again; they have the power to say no.

Too many people are afraid to ask "the" question—do you wanna go out sometime? do you wanna go FBO? do you wanna put this gimpsuit on?—because they're afraid the answer will be "no." But it's better to know the answer is "no" than to wonder. And in your case, TA, the answer could very well be "yes." It's possible that these guys don't want another go at you—maybe you suck in bed?—but it's just as likely that they had a blast with you but they're hesitant to ask for a repeat because they genuinely like you and don't want you to conclude that they're only interested in your ass, not your friendship.

Tell them how you're feeling: you enjoyed messing around, you'd like to do it again, you'd be up for something regular. And give 'em an out when you ask: Tell 'em that you don't know what their rules and limitations are—some couples have an "only once" rule, to prevent romantic attachments—and that you want to see your friendship continue to grow regardless of what they decide.

 

Comments (39) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Maybe link the picture instead of embedding? It'd be nice to get to see the reply without the potential porno.
Posted by Ben on January 9, 2012 at 3:39 PM · Report this
bigg 2
I enjoyed the picture, at least. As for the letter... Sorry, I'm just not convinced that monogamish is better. If anything, I feel like it's a step down - like rubber sheets for someone who wets the bed, monogamish feels (to me!) like commitment-lite for those who can't manage the real thing. I know that makes me a douche in a lot of people's eyes... But I've never tried to have (or desired) a monogamish relationship, I don't bash people who do and I think that what makes each of us personally happy is the only yardstick by which to measure. So if monogamish makes some people happy then they should go for it.
Long story short, it's just not for me.
Posted by bigg http://biggblah.blogspot.com/ on January 9, 2012 at 3:50 PM · Report this
very bad homo 3
To the 2nd guy - Just say "That was fun, let me know if you want to do it again sometime."
Posted by very bad homo on January 9, 2012 at 3:54 PM · Report this
JensR 4
#1 its a butt... not even crack... just a butt. You have one, I have one, very bad homo and mr-dont-like-it above have one. Its not exactly porn... But on the other hand if you find that erotic beyond control heres another little thing for you:

3:::O <--- its a penis see? Ooooh full frontal male nudity... ;)
Posted by JensR http://ohyran.se on January 9, 2012 at 4:31 PM · Report this
seatackled 5
Wait, is that a guy's butt or a woman's butt? How are we supposed to know if we can be turned on or not?
Posted by seatackled on January 9, 2012 at 4:42 PM · Report this
6
@4: Whoa, easy there buddy. I'm just browsing at work is all, and offering a suggestion. It's not about what I consider porn, it's about what HR considers porn. And I can't think of an argument against linking that doesn't boil down to "Shut up."

I'm not freaking out, I'm not crying foul, I'm just making a suggestion that doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
Posted by Ben on January 9, 2012 at 4:51 PM · Report this
Kevin_BGFH 7
@2 - Hmmm. I'm not so sure I would consider it to be "commitment-lite," personally. Maybe because I don't see sexual exclusivity to be a part of commitment necessarily. I think of commitment as taking care of one another, financially and emotionally. Which can include, in varying permutations, sharing money (or at least supporting one another economically when the other is down), sharing a living situation together, and supporting each other emotionally. And the latter also means being supportive of each other's feelings when you aren't being sexually exclusive.

I always considered myself to be a monogamous gay. Then I got a boyfriend many years ago who persuaded me to give other non-monogamous options a try. And there were two benefits for me. First, I got to three-way with some hot guys who were into him but not really into me. And second, it actually reduced some pressure on me, because I felt that if I wasn't good enough at a particular thing he was into, he didn't need to make an "all or nothing" choice.
Posted by Kevin_BGFH http://biggayfrathouse.typepad.com/blog/ on January 9, 2012 at 4:53 PM · Report this
8
Holy shit that ass is amazing, holy fucking shit. Holy fuck. Goddammit. I have so many squats to do in 2012.
Posted by greeeen with envy. on January 9, 2012 at 5:07 PM · Report this
Max Solomon 9
DTMFA. D all TMFA!

it's not a monogamish relationship he wants, it's polyamory.
Posted by Max Solomon on January 9, 2012 at 5:13 PM · Report this
10
Seeing that picture just makes me have to ask,

How the hell is it so many people get random scars and such on their asses?

Peace.
Posted by Married in MA on January 9, 2012 at 5:15 PM · Report this
11
Referring to @10,

I got mine falling onto a high jump bar.

Peace.
Posted by Married in MA on January 9, 2012 at 5:18 PM · Report this
12
FBO?

.. and I did google it first
Posted by truck on January 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM · Report this
seandr 13
@10: Mine was a copy machine prank gone awry.
Posted by seandr on January 9, 2012 at 5:54 PM · Report this
14
@10/11 my poor ass, while curvy, has a few stretch marks. Damned kids.

And this, boys and girls, is why you should be very selective as to whom you send revealing photos. Do you suppose Mr not so impressive ass is aware that his is out there for public consumption?

Posted by catballou on January 9, 2012 at 5:58 PM · Report this
15
@12 "Facebook Official" - ie, offically dating.
Posted by EricaP on January 9, 2012 at 6:00 PM · Report this
16
@14: I wrote back to the LW, got her permission, and his, before running the photo -- which has no identifying details, characteristics, tattoos, etc.

I'm careful about this shit, people.
Posted by Dan Savage on January 9, 2012 at 6:02 PM · Report this
17
@10: Terrible yoga accident.
Posted by LateBloomer on January 9, 2012 at 6:03 PM · Report this
18
Dispatches from Gommorah.

depravity and debauchery.

its all good tonight.

the itchy oozing and baby killing will come later....
Posted by STDs and Infanticide on January 9, 2012 at 6:14 PM · Report this
19
@1 If you're worried about HR, avoid the NY Times, too - it has words like santorum smeared all over it.
Posted by Ivan on January 9, 2012 at 6:28 PM · Report this
20
@ 1 Then you probably shouldn't be on Slog at work cause the ads they have are more offensive to HR than the butt
Posted by Democrat1234 on January 9, 2012 at 6:35 PM · Report this
21
Loved that, 19.
Posted by Mousechild on January 9, 2012 at 7:26 PM · Report this
22
@20. I suppose there are people who use Ad blocker of some sort at work for that reason.
Posted by geekgirl on January 9, 2012 at 8:11 PM · Report this
23
Well put by Mr Savage.

It's hard to see this ending well, though part of it may be the possible Freudian slip in DWTBAT's choice of acronym. She contributed to the yellow card, is giving off potential competitive vibrations, and appears, on the basis of one encounter and a series of calls and texts which are perhaps more than he's supposed to be doing, to expect the couple to change to accommodate her preferences. While one can certainly inquire into their arrangements for outside encounters singly rather than in tandem, it's easier to see her trying to argue them into what she wants than accepting their parameters. It also seems telling that, despite the calls and texts and his share of the yellow card incident, he's reluctant to ask for permission, yet DWTBAT still wants to push it.
Posted by vennominon on January 9, 2012 at 8:32 PM · Report this
24
Huh. Ostensibly it's a picture of a butt, yet all I see is a dick.
Posted by Mr. J on January 9, 2012 at 9:13 PM · Report this
Just Jeff 25
Can Me and Mine have a three-way with Kate Winslet?? Pretty please? That's on our "list", and I'm really looking forward to it.
Posted by Just Jeff on January 9, 2012 at 9:30 PM · Report this
26
#5 FTW! I scrolled before reading and was later surprised to find out that curvy bum and little waist belonged to a dude.
Posted by Mary Mary Why You Buggin on January 9, 2012 at 10:21 PM · Report this
seandr 27
Let's see his cock!
Posted by seandr on January 9, 2012 at 10:53 PM · Report this
28
@26 Mary,

Compared to a mature woman's pelvis the geometry of the hips looks wrong. Don't ask me to define it better than "looks wrong" though (I have commented in the past about my useless ability to spot cross dressers, perhaps the skeletal geometry is a big part it. For the record, I have no problem with cross dressing, and have only admiration of the skill of some of "It's" practitioners.).

I agree with @23 vennominion,

This has "Danger Will Robinson" all over it. Maybe use a cool off period before asking for another round, in order to let the primary relationship gel?

Peace.
Posted by Married in MA on January 10, 2012 at 4:20 AM · Report this
29
@10 I've got two: first is GSW when I was 17 and a friend was being stupid, the second was from a BMX mishap on a neighborhood course.
Posted by delwalk on January 10, 2012 at 8:11 AM · Report this
debug 30
Nobody going to mention the amazing new (to me) phrase "screw diligence"? Googling it only brings up a couple hundred hits. Love it.
Posted by debug on January 10, 2012 at 8:42 AM · Report this
31
@10 . . . from life . . . when I was not paying attention, it bit me in the ass.
Posted by From the South (as in CA) on January 10, 2012 at 9:25 AM · Report this
32
I disagree with the DS statement on power in a relationship. Being an adjunct (i.e. a third, fourth, whatever) means just that, you are an adjunct that can be replaced. This differs from a poly relationship where you are (or should be)an integral part of the relationship with a degree of actual power. As I see it, one of the risks in a poly relationship is the danger of being marginalized (my concern/opinion and one of the reasons I wouldn't be comfortable in a poly relationship).

As an aside. Some of the often stated reasons that monogamy is not natural is that people can't control their emotions, who they are attracted to, their need or desire for sex, etc. I would think that these would be greater risks in any form of open relationship since you would be engaged in actions that increase the probability of them occuring. The potential exists in any relationship, there are no ironclad guaranties. Various people stress the need for communication and rules in an open relationship, but isn't that true for any relationship. If they fail in a monogamous relationship, why should they succeed in an open relationship? (not being judgmental, this is a real question, not a rhetorical one)

Back from the aside. As in all relationships, the Golden Rule (cynical version) applies. He who has the gold makes the rules. In many (most?) relationships power is not evenly distributed between the parties involved. Financial resources, social or celebrity status,and a whole lot of others can and usually does determine who has power and how much they have. If you are dependent on someone else, do really have power beyond what the other person is willing to give you (and they can always take it back)

Getting rather long winded (sound and fury signifying nothing kind of things) Goodbye
More...
Posted by truth? and its consequences on January 10, 2012 at 11:41 AM · Report this
33
@29 delwalk,

GSW == Gun Shot Wound?!!!

WTF!!!

Shooting a friend in the ass is a little beyond just stupid!

Peace.
Posted by Married in MA on January 10, 2012 at 12:33 PM · Report this
34
@2, No one is saying that monogamishy (monogamishness? monogamishdom?) is better, per se, than monogamy. It's better for some people, and worse for some people. (And it may be more natural for most people.) That's all there is to it. No one's trying to convince you to change, and preferring monogamy does not make you a douche. All Dan is trying to do, and all these letters are doing, is legitimizing it as a choice that CAN work for people.
Posted by Drusilla on January 10, 2012 at 12:44 PM · Report this
35
@32: re your aside: I think the theory is that in an open relationship, one can allow these outside attractions to take place, and under the right circumstances even act on them, without that necessarily meaning the end of the existing relationship. In a nutshell, that developing a severe case of wanting another person does not have to mean that want for one's partner is thereby destroyed.

In monogamy one _must_ control those emotions, or at least deny them. In poly, presumably one doesn't have to exercise such tight control (over something that, as you note, can't truly be controlled anyway -- at best, not acted on.)
Posted by avast2006 on January 10, 2012 at 2:39 PM · Report this
36
Back to Letter Writer's situation: her letter does not sound very promising. "Hi, Girlfriend, Just so you know, you I could take or leave, but I think your boy is hot stuff and want permission to play with him with you out of the picture. signed, Does-Not-Want-To-Be-A-Third." Yeah, I can see that one going over real well, particularly given Hot-Boy-Toy's rather overenthusiastic reception for you. I would not blame Girlfriend for one nanosecond for feeling seriously threatened by both of your behavior.

If you want to keep playing with Boyfriend, you are going to need to find some way to convince Girlfriend that you don't want Boyfriend all to yourself -- if not that you care about her, that at very, very least you have a deep abiding respect for their relationship, into which you have been invited for the sole purpose of casual play. Frankly, you have already managed to convince me of the exact opposite of that with just one quick paragraph and a questionable sign-off.
Posted by avast2006 on January 10, 2012 at 2:49 PM · Report this
37
"Too many people are afraid to ask "the" question ...."

here's what happened when i wasn't afraid to ask "the" question: i got a bad reputation among my women-friends that i was a sleezy borderline-abusive guy who "only" cared about sex. they spread rumors about me among themselves and to other people, pretty much ruining the circle of friends i thought i had. in their eyes i was already tried and convicted before i knew anything was an issue. "the" question i asked was if the person i was interested would be also be interested in a casual, FWB-type sexy times.

it would be nice to think we could live in a world where you could be honest with your desires, but no. there are real risks, contrary to what dan may say, even if you have some evidence they might be interested.
Posted by aoeustnh on January 10, 2012 at 4:37 PM · Report this
38
The best way to earn a repeat performance is to demonstrate your sincere respect for the existing relationship and make sure the less-interested (or less-interesting) partner understands you are not trying to compete with or replace them. Because you aren't, right?
Posted by Chase on January 10, 2012 at 10:46 PM · Report this
Registered European 39
@37:
it would be nice to think we could live in a world where you could be honest with your desires, but no. there are real risks


@37 is right. Many years ago, I wasn't afraid to ask "the question" to a colleague. Nothing more than "let's go out for drinks sometime", which was declined. In retrospect, it was stupid of me to ask a question like this at work. I later found out that through probably embellished gossip I had acquired the reputation of being a female coworker-stalking creep. People love to gossip and won't hesitate to destroy someone's reputation in the process.
Posted by Registered European on January 15, 2012 at 10:47 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy