My hope is that SFMCN is just young and naive, and that years from now he'll have more perspective and be embarrassed by the level of sanctimony he spews here. Even if he remains convinced monogamy is the way for him to go.

I have friends in non-monogamous relationships that are anything but "superficial". They also demand self-control like any others - just in different forms.

I miss being young and sanctimonious - now I'm just sanctimonious.
What an insufferable little twerp. He makes me feel like going out and having a fling. Anybody out there looking for a quickie?

No, really...promise to stop pushing your ideals on everybody else, and we promise not to date you.
@2, I know, right? Sanctimony goes a lot better with a high tight bubble butt.

This kid's pretty classic Young Republican: "I have never had a relationship, so here's how all you who are having them ought to behave!" Future Log Cabin local chapter delegate, I fear.
Oh, Catalina, my dear. I would so do a quickie with you, but I'm too busy fixing the plumbing. (That's part of the gay agenda they never told me about when I signed up for this long-term relationship thing.)
Bloody Hell, Dan; Both you and this Jeremy Hooper dude were so fucking comprehensive, articulate, and compassionate, it was a thing of beauty to read.

Except for all the "wanna"s. What is this "wanna" b.s?

And the reference to Laci Peterson, which SFMCN is likely too young to get (and if not, doubtless would misunderstand as your saying that Scott Peterson was a murder *because* his marriage was closed, and then extrapolate that to mean that you infer that all monogamous marriages end in murder).
As for SFMCN, Dan has been hugely popular since before you were born mostly because he's right most of the time... including that video.

Very few people, straight or gay, are 100% monogamous. Monogamy need not be an absolute either/or thing. As you get older, you'll realize that many things are not as absolute as you like to think they are when you're young.

I've been in a relationship for well over 20 years. When we first got together, the notion of gay marriage didn't even exist. We were free to form whatever sort of relationship we wanted. We chose to be monogamous. Thats what we modeled, that surreal 1950s ideal. It didn't really work out that way. Both of us have fallen off the wagon once or twice. Relationships are messy. But despite occasional lapses and the messiness of a long-term relationship, we are still mostly monogamous. Our relationship is anything but superficial. Just because I have on occasion had sex with someone else doesn't mean I'll sleep with any guy any time, nor does it mean that I am not committed to my partner, as our 20+ year relationship will attest.

Finally, just as you don't like people telling you that you should be straight, I don't like you telling me that I should be monogamous. It is the same thing: pressuring people to be something they are not. If two guys want to be monogamous, super. Go for it. But if another couple chooses not to be monogamous, who are you to tell them they're wrong?
Aw, lighten up a little folks... if LW is the least bit cute/attractive he will be having so much fun with cock in a few months that he will look back at his sanctimonious sayings as just one of the many dumb things one says when one is new to the game.
@8 (Reverse Polarity):
About a year ago, Sugar had a question about monogamy and infidelity that had a similar amount of sanctimonious judgment. Her answer, while not sanctioning or advocating monogamishness, still dealt beautifully with the lw's judgment, and brought up some of the same points you do:…
@3: Ha! My sentiments exactly.
As a straight dude I am really grateful that Dan is opening (sorry) the conversation in public discourse about relationships and how widely they can, and should, vary. When I was a younger man I too had ideals about love and romance, believing in 'the one' and all that shit. I suffered for it IMMENSELY. By trying to hold my relationships to those ridiculous ideas I got hurt badly many times. That's why I've loosened up and let go of that.

I would say I hope you don't ever have to suffer like that, but relationships, even the best ones, ALWAYS involve some pain. The way to lesson that is by NOT creating stupid narratives about what it is and should be. Just enjoy it, be in the moment, and know that all things must pass.

Oh, and while you're young just fucking get some and have some fucking fun for chrissake. Damn. (I say that 'cause I wish someone had said that to the 19 year old me.)
Man, what a great response to that kid. I'm not sure most of us in the comments could be that patient... I think it must be the province of the young to believe that the world is, with 100% certainty, like this, and therefore, the only possible course of action is that, which is what everyone should do. And there is no possibility for changing one's mind on this topic, after being in a few relationships oneself.

Not saying that he will definitely change his mind/views as he gets older (many don't, obviously, and that's perfectly fine), but at least be open to the possibility that how you see things now may change someday (on this, or any topic). The world is full of gray, kid...
SFMCN, you're mistaking "open" for fucking anything in sight. That's more what straight guys do if Jersey Shore is any indication of current straight community attitudes. I mean all straight guys are pretty much exactly like The Situation and his crew, aren't they? No? Ah, maybe my idea of what it means to be straight is off kilter then.

I trust you get the point.

Even in SF, I know some monogamous gay couples. I also know some triads, some wide open relationships, open relationships with more rules than most monogamous couples, and some total (ethical) sluts.

You've worked out what you need in a relationship. Hurray. Good luck finding a match. When you find him, hopefully he'll like you back the same way.
Fantastic response to the kid. Let people have the relationships they want - if they're not harming anyone/thing, then who cares?
@1 - I suspect that's the case. When I was younger, barely out and hadn't dated anyone in my life, there was nothing I wanted more than to find one guy out there to grow old with in monogamy. When you first come out, thinking that you only want to ever date and screw one guy is a comforting thought when facing a future of uncertainty. It's also impractical.

Dan's right when he says that coming out is like starting to date all over again at age 15--with the same hiccups along the way. And quite a number of 15-year-olds are dreaming about "the one".

Then I grew up and actually started dating (and screwing) other people. Now I'm in a long-term, monogamous relationship with the door open for future non-monogamy--after the appropriate discussion--if it means that it'll keep our relationship healthier and us happier.
Wow, seems like none of you were ever young and naive... Maybe he'll read Jeremy and Dan's response and understand. He obviously had no understanding of Dan's position and hopefully now he does.

I think he has less to worry about with monogamy and more with dealing with the members of our community who are just bitter and mean like some of the responses.
I will probably be shot down for this, but the difference between gay relationships and straight ones is that gays are more open about non-monogamy.

Having said that, 12 years here of gay monogamy and counting.

SFMCN, although I think some of responses before me here are a little on the harsh side, the basic premise of them is mostly correct.

Nothing wrong with wanting monogamy. Putting down those who don't feel the same is where you are being unfair and narrow minded. Just because it isn't for you doesn't mean that those who choose it are somehow less committed to their relationships or weak people with no self control.

Your basic question is easy to answer. Not only are there gay people who want monogamous relationships, there are a quite a few of them.

What does happen sometimes is that people who are not suited for open relationships get into them because they think they should and that if they don't they are being provincial, old fashioned or emulating some kind of "heteronormative" behavior, and make a mess of their relationship. And there are people who are not suited to monogamy who force themselves into it because they share opinions like yours that belittle and put down alternative models of relationships. And they mess up their supposedly monogamous relationships.

You can't judge or condemn either monogamy or non-monogamy based on these failures because the real failure isn't something inherent in the relationship model. It was a failure of the individuals who try to force themselves to fit some model that they weren't suited for.

The real problem with you is that you seem to be a good candidate for fucking up your relationships for that very reason. Not that you aren't necessarily suited for monogamy, but because if you aren't you probably won't figure that out until after you cause several relationships to implode, messing up not just yourself but a string of partners along the way.

That's because your negative attitude towards alternative relationship models will prevent you from every seriously considering if one of them might not be a better fit for you. Regardless if you are suited to monogamy or non-monogamy, you are going to force yourself into monogamy simply because you have adopted so many negative ideas about the alternatives.

If you were cool with everyone else doing as they liked, and just felt that this one way was a good fit for you I wouldn't worry. That you seem to think that this one way is the only legitimate way, and that anyone who doesn't adopt it are somehow weak and lacking in character of some kind paints a very different view of your potential future.

When I was younger I only wanted monogamy because I thought that was really just the was it was supposed to be done. So I ended up spending my late teen to mid 20's going through a succession of serial monogamy relationships. The problem for me wasn't that I wasn't suited to be monogamous. It was that I was too young to be thinking of being serious to begin with. But I couldn't see that.

Then in my midish 20's I got a clue and realized I didn't need to commit to someone. I could just have some fun, and that is what I did. And at that time I got to see all sorts of people with different kinds of relationships and to see that all models have their unique challenges and issues, but none are inherently better.

At one point I was casually dating three different guys (they all knew), and I found that although I liked all of them well enough I wasn't willing to get too serious with them, but I kind of wanted to. But I realized that I was not capable of making that kind of commitment in an open situation. It was all fine though, because I was still just having fun.

Then I met my current partner. I met him and almost immediately broke it off with the other three. We dated, and we eventually committed with an agreement to monogamy. Now over 16 years later we are still happily together. I know I have kept my commitment to him, and I am as sure as anyone possibly can be that he has kept that commitment to me.

Among our friends are couples who have been together around the same amount of time. Some are monogamous. Some are not. All have long lasting, committed, serious and successful relationships. We have all found what works for us.

However I probably never would have found what really worked for me, even though it turned out to be what I thought I wanted from the start, if I hadn't let go of my ideas of what things "should" be and simply saw what was the best fit for me.

If monogamy will work for you it will take you letting go of your bad attitude about everything else before you will really know. And if it is you will find someone who shares that, because despite the doom and gloom of some people the fact is that there are plenty of monogamy minded gay guys out there. But once you really figure yourself out only then will you be able to sort out the guys you meet who really are suited for monogamy from those who just think they should be but really aren't. That is the real key to monogamy. Getting past all the BS to figure out who has really figured out what they want and who hasn't.
There's also a big distinction between having a a fling or a fuck buddy, with whom you each do not share any additional expectations, and being emotionally committed to your partner to meet each others' emotional needs in addition to the physical. Sex is not the same as love.
@17: I've always said that the difference between a gay relationship and straight relationship is the likelihood and/or the frequency of hearing your spouse utter this sentence: "Honey, it's been too long since we had a threesome."

I'd like to tell you a story, but first a bit about myself. I'm a polyamorous and queer woman. However, I frequent a gay man's bar. (It's five blocks from my house, and has karaoke, which I don't believe I can say about any of the girl bars in town.) Anyway, I was sitting in a group of gay men, and I the only woman present. They were talking about how much they value monogamy. I made a disparaging comment about how monogamy is overrated. They all pretty emphatically disagreed with me. Not one, out of the ten other people in the conversation agreed with my outlook. (Notice the switch of stereotypical gender roles there? Nice, huh?)

I know this is anecdotal, but ten out of ten is a pretty good indication of the interest in monogamy as a lifestyle within your community. Obviously, I know that this is not across the board (I know plenty of gay men who are very much poly or monogamish.) But, basically the stereotype of gay men all wanting open relationships is decidedly not true. If for no other reason, then because of the amount of prestige that monogamous relationships are held up within our culture.

While I don't think monogamy is a great way to go, I recognize that maybe I've just not found "the one" to tempt me into it. I hope you do find your "one". And congrats on coming out!
Wow, Dan, there was a whole pile of issues in that letter and you handled all of 'em well. Bravo.

@1, I'm hoping the same thing. It seems like he's deathly afraid that someone will cheat on him someday because Mr. Dan Savage said that open relationships are okay. It says a lot about his trepidations as he starts dating. Some experience will show him that love and sex are not all black and white, and most people are good people.
26 years of monogamy here. Never would have happened if not for the wild debauchery that preceded it. No one should worry about monogamy until they have tried all the other options. Like so many types of piety, it is much easier to reform than to resist temptation.
So we have a gay man who believes that promiscuity is bad and that sex should also be about love and devotion? WOHOO!! YEAH! APPROPRIATE THE BEST PARTS OF CONSERVATIVE VIEWS OF SEX AND CLAIM THEM AS YOUR OWN! Reject the all-or-nothing fallacy! Just because conservatives believe it doesn't mean it's wrong!

And good luck, young man. Good luck.
@1 Believing that promiscuity is bad and that self control is good isn't sanctimony. It's character.
What an odd, odd letter.

With 60% of heterosexual men cheating on their wives and 40% of heterosexual women cheating on their husbands, one can only wonder if what SFMCN truly seeks is to model his own relationships after people who have sexual relations outside of their marriages and LIE to each other about it.

In any case, this kid is in for a rude awakening.

And for the record, kiddo, my partner and I have been monogamous for 12+ years now. And we're... wait for it...


SFMCN, unfortunately, seems to have believed what heterosexuals have taught him about himself, and for that I feel sorry for him.

Good luck to you, SFMCN. You're going to need it. It's a jungle out there.
Letter Writer,

If you’re reading this, I have a question for you. Why do you want to be monogamy, anyway? I’m not saying at all that you shouldn’t want it; I’m only asking why it’s important to you.

There are a few indirect clues in your letter (“I’ve just recently come out of the closet to my mom and the rest of my family,“ and “It rubs me the wrong way because, as a community, gay people are still fighting for our rights…I would hope someone like you would be more careful about what you say publicly.”) that hint at a bigger concern with keeping up appearances than with leading a happy life. But I presume your feelings run deeper than that. Or maybe they don’t.

So why is monogamy important to you?
Letter Writer,

One more thought. You wrote “Self control is all about knowing you can do something and deciding you won’t do it. “ True as far as it goes, but like much of your letter, it substitutes a platitude for any real moral consideration. Why should or shouldn’t you do a thing? What is the right thing to do, and why?

Consider anorexia – possibly the most pathological feat of self control ever. These people know they can feed their own starving bodies, but choose not to. That doesn’t actually make them superior people or shining examples of fortitude. And yet, in their pathological state, that’s exactly what many of them believe it does. Anorexia isn’t just about body image, it’s about behavior.

“Self control” seems so self-evidently virtuous, yet can be twisted into self destruction. Is it within your moral universe to consider the same may be true of monogamy? I’m not terribly interested in whether you answer is yes or no. I’m interested in why your answer is yes or no.

Yest but believing that promiscuity and self control are mutually exclusive is sanctimony.

Oh, and do you think it's telling of anything that in a discussion of monogamy vs nonmonogamy, the word you jumped to is "promiscuity"?

I do totally agree with you that sex can also be about love and devotion. I just put the emphasis on "also."

Just reread my string of verbosity here. To the Letter Writer. When I wrote "I’m not terribly interested in whether you answer is yes or no" I expressed myself poorly and I apologize. What I actually meant, is: it's entirely up to you if your answer is yes or no and you should absolutely live your life by the answer you find. But I really hope - both for your sake and for the betterment of the world by having one more morally mature person in it - that you find the answer through wrestling with the complexity of the question, not just through received "wisdom."

There. Now I'm done talking with myself for the night.
@32 - Yawn. Hitler was faithful to his girlfriend. Character is marked by showing honesty and respect for others in all of one's personal relationships. It is not defined by having sex with only one person at a time.

Enjoy monogamy. But leave everyone else who doesn't alone.
whoops, that should be @26 not @32.
LW says "I believe all open relationships are superficial."

Well then, it must be so!
"You seemed to suggest that monogamy was only for heterosexual people."
Riiiight, because heterosexuals never, ever want to swing, or have open relationships. Or cheat. Nope. Never happens.

"Frankly, Dan, it's the acceptance of open relationships in the gay community that makes me not want to connect with the gay community AT ALL. Because now I have to wonder if my future partner is going to leave me because I don't want to "swing," or if I will never find a partner because I want a closed relationship."

Uh, ditto. What community ARE you going to connect with? You will find open-relationshippers pretty much everywhere you look: gay, straight, religious, secular. If you plan on damning entire demographics for the public words of one guy in their midst, you are going to grow up mighty lonely. Do you honestly think the entire gay population takes Dan Savage as gospel, concerning how they personally feel about open relationships? Do you honestly think there aren't any other gays who feel the same way you do? If being gay means you have to have a predisposition towards open relationships, then how the hell do we explain YOU?

"I believe that all open relationships are superficial."

In this case "believe" being synonymous with "I don't know a damned thing about it, having vowed never to experience it myself, but that isn't going to stop me from talking shit about it."

Honestly, I suggest you watch that video a few more times, because you clearly misunderstood it the first time.
Great response. Hooper's reply was pitch-perfect and you didn't rise to the bait of SFMCN's apparent hostility.

You treated SFMCN's question with respect even though he didn't offer your perspective on relationships the same courtesy. Often, one of the hardest lessons to learn is that two people can follow two different paths and both people can be right in their choice.

SFMCN's lack of respect might stem from the fact that he feels alone and fears he will be judged by the gay community, which causes a defensive backlash against those (the gay community/other gay men) whose rejection he fears. It seems like it would be extremely painful to struggle with accepting your sexuality as a gay man only then to feel like "your" community might reject you because you don't meet perceived expectations (or stereotypes).

I hope SFMCN gets what he needs from this response.
Wow. Seriously. What an amazing, intelligent and beautifully put conversation, here. What an amazing forum. Other than the snarkiness - he's a kid for god's sake; he's naive by definition so give him a break, please - I find it moving that this kid's heartfelt, apparently heart wrenching concerns were addressed in such intelligent, equally heartfelt ways. Bravo slog. Bravo Dan and Jeremy.

Just want to add that I love this video. It's simply the truth for a lot of people - probably most people - especially over time - that looking at your mate and saying 'I'll never see another naked person in my life' absolutely = despair. I think it's important that this be admitted to and 'outed'. We are totally lying to ourselves and our mates otherwise.

Of COURSE everyone likes the idea that we'll always desire our mate and want nobody else and vice versa, that we won't ever stray or want to, but that's as rare as can be and a massively tall order to begin with, and I believe, unnatural, and in most cases unsustainable over time. Come on -30, 40, 50 yrs, day in and day out with the same person and never craving anyone else? The marriages I know of that have lasted this long that are monogamous are entirely sexless and have been for many years - sometimes decades. This is not uncommon. The sex died because there are only so many ways you can keep it fresh and exciting over a 20 or 30 or 40+ year period. Period. It's damn near impossible.

That said, I don't know that monogamish is the answer as I've never done it, but clearly for some people it works, and even apparently manages in the process to revive the flame with their mate. Based on that alone, and obviously factoring in for safety and no unwanted babies, it's worth respect and serious consideration.
As far as I'm concerned, gay couples being less concerned about strict monogamy puts them way ahead of the curve relative to hetero(normative)s. You can be monogamous if you want, SFMCN, and that's fine as long as it works for you; but please don't mistake it for a matter of right and wrong, and even more importantly, don't mistake it for an indication of, or substitute for, caring or devotion.
@27: "With 60% of heterosexual men cheating on their wives and 40% of heterosexual women cheating on their husbands"

I've never quite understood how that statistic works. Who are those extra 50% of male cheaters cheating with? Either there is a very large segment of the single female population that thinks that going after married men is the bees' knees, or there is a very large segment of married women who lie on surveys.



and the HIV rate.....
@ 41 - You forgot one possibility: that those 40% of married women are cheating way more than their fare share.
@ 41 - Actually, you forgot quite a bunch of possibilities:

Women might be more inclined to have an affair, so they'll stick to one man when they cheat.

Men might be more inclined to have casual sex (on top of affairs, or not) with unmarried women, sex workers or... other men (I've had sex with dozens of married men, so it's definitely a possibility; funny how they only tell you they're married once the sex is over, though).

And I'm sure there are many other possibilities.

Please note the use of the words "might" and "possibilities", everyone, before telling me I'm sexist or something.
After watching that clip, my only beef is with Dan's assertion that monogamy "is never easy". I've heard him say this before, and I've heard him accuse anyone who claims that monogamy is easy of being a bullshitter. I could get behind the statement "relationships are never easy", since they require work, sacrifice, and the ability to admit when you're wrong and apologize. But monogamy isn't an aspect of my relationship that's ever been difficult for me. My husband is attracted to far more people than I am, so he might have a different perspective. I will say that if he's struggling not to cheat, he's doing a damn good job of hiding it.
I thought I was reading a letter from a teenaged Morrissey. I had to check the calendar to make sure of the year.
Just to reiterate @7: Dan, what's with the "wanna"? Even in casual conversational writing it kind of (kinda?) disrupts the flow. I'm wondering if doing that hyper-cutesy MTV gig is causing you to regress into your college-age persona. It would be a shame.
I'm also a monogamous queer person, and I used to feel the same way you do. Totally okay with other people having open relationships if they want, but I've been certain from very early on that it wasn't for me. I used to really resent that open relationships are such a thing in the queer community, though, because when I was younger I couldn't find anyone to date who didn't want an open relationship either, and ended up either turning down people that I really liked or being in relationships that didn't make me happy at all.

Now that I'm older and have more freedom and a bigger dating pool, I've changed my mind. I still like monogamy, and if my current relationship breaks up and I date again, I'd like there to at least be a significant amount of other monogamous queers to pick from, but I've become pretty okay with nonmonogamy being seen as normal too.

Think of it this way- there's a social pressure towards monogamy, especially for straight people, where presenting yourself as monogamous can be the only way to get a partner. Some people are just not good at monogamy, or don't really see the point, or just prefer not to be monogamous. And those people might be more likely to cheat, or to insist on opening up the relationship at some future point when there might be kids or shared finances- not because they're bad people, but because having that pressure there towards monogamy takes away their option to be open about it early on and find other people who either don't care or who want to be open, too. When it's not the monogamy parade 24/7 in your community, somebody who claims to be monogamous is a lot more likely to actually be monogamous. I mean, if a guy says "Dan says I can have an open relationship, so let's have an open relationship," that isn't a person who would prefer to be monogamous in the first place. That's a person who's looking for permission to do what they want to do in the first place, and who eventually will most likely do it anyway, permission or not.

There is a huge difference between a person who's attracted to people besides their partner but chooses to keep it in their pants anyway because monogamy is important to them, and a person who is nonmonogamous. Both people are making a choice based on what they want in a relationship and what's important to them, and you can't turn a nonmonogamous person into a monogamous person just by telling them to "have some self-control". Self-control is internally imposed! It's somebody putting off immediate gratification for the sake of something that's more personally important. It's a matter of values- of the subjective, everyone cares about different things kind, not of the "I'm more moral than you" kind- and that's not something you or Dan or any one person can change in somebody else.

So don't think of the acceptance of open relationships as a bad thing, think of it as a very good thing. Maybe right now you're missing out on some dates, but in the future, you'll be way less likely to have a cheating husband or an "If you don't let me sleep with other people, I'm leaving you" ultimatum. It's a smaller monogamy parade nowadays, but it's a much more genuine one, and I think you'd be happier if you focused on that. Personally, I'm really glad my partner is someone who's been exposed to nonmonogamy, given it some thought, and said "no thanks", instead of someone who's just going along with it because that's what's done.
With all due respect, Doug, shut up. You raise some valid points, but those kind of arguments mean nothing to folks like the letter writer. This isn't a situation that can be solved by presenting a logical argument. This is about sex, which isn't exactly a logical or rational activity.

No... what people like this letter writer need is time. And stories like Mr. Hooper's. These are personal examples which can give people something they can empathize and connect with.
Gay man. 100% monogamous relationship for seven years now. We have vague plans to have kids once we're done moving around in another few years.

And really kid? You should reserve judgement on the "gay community" until you meet it. What you get from third party sources is incredibly distorted. So even if you decide it's not the community for you (it's not for everyone) you'll have decided for yourself, and not let your biased sources decide for you.
Whoa! I won't accuse the LW of being sanctimonious, but he certainly does flit from one thing to another. First he says he despised you after watching the video; then he says he came to respect you after seeing the IGB campaign. That's a quick flip-flop.

I feel his greatest motivation for attacking you and your views is fear. Suddenly, just because you've apparently decreed – in his opinion – that all gay relationships should be promiscuous and shallow (Wow, see how important you are, Dan, to wield So. Much. Power), everyone will look down at him, especially his mom, believing that he will immediately become promiscuous to match the characteristics of this uniform, monolithic gay community in which he knows everyone and everything (NOT).

He's played the “What if” game but, instead of being focused on a Happily-Ever-After scenario, he's already moved beyond it to the ::gasps:: partner betrayal and breakup.

To put it kindly, the kid needs to learn how to listen and read more carefully. He completely missed your message in the video where you're trying to ... uh ... SAVE marriages which – based on statistics – are at risk of failure, even after only a single moment of infidelity. [BTW, your comparison to sobriety was spot on.]

I hope a few years down the road he will learn how to be more compassionate and less quick to judge. If not, I don't think monogamy will be in the cards ... and it'll have absolutely nothing to do with sexual fidelity.
@41 those extra men are cheating with each other. Now, that makes it all much more interesting, doesn't it?
Bravo for your mature and honest response, Dan. Trying to force sexuality into boxes of Shoulds and Shouldn'ts doesn't work and isn't helpful. The stereotypes SFMCN is spewing about open relationships are exactly the same stereotypes that gay people had to overcome, and hopefully he'll realize that and turn more tolerant after reading this.
Though I agree the LW is a twerp, as a hopelessly monogamous person myself I can kinda-sorta understand where he's coming from. In my mid-20s I was cheated on by my first love and went through a phase when I considered sex without commitment to be just wrong and evil. I found it threatening that most/many people could screw for fun while the idea of even kissing anyone but my boyfriend made me feel physically ill. It took me awhile to realize that my attitude was coming from my own insecurities and feelings of betrayal. I'm still monogamous by nature but I realize that an honest open relationship is a relationship worthy of as much respect as any honest relationship. Hopefully the LW will gain some perspective, good on Dan and Jeremy for their responses--they really were excellent.
A.) He'll probably look back on this in 5 years and be embarrassed. B.) He should know that there's no better time to be out in the dating pool with monogamous tendencies. If we're all becoming more open with who we are, it's more likely that the guy you're dating who says he's into monogamy is saying so because he is, not because society expects that of him.
Mr Savage - Regarding the threesomes, I've generally held that that's mainly one potential logistical advantage of a same-sex partnership. Yes, some one-sex threeways operate similarly to those with mixed sexes, but a pair of Kinsey 6s starts out with a huge advantage over a pair of Kinsey 0s in having an equally fun for both time with a third.

As for Mr Hooper, his history seems to suggest that Ms Erica was likely right about the text-dumper.

Both responses had a nice, patient tone, so often helpful with the newly out, especially the trying ones.

I'd refer the LW to *Rumpole and the Reform of Joby Johnson* with particular attention to how Mizz Liz Probert's initial response to Dot Clapton's nasal jewel is radical free-spirited sisterhoodly approval - until she notices Dot twinkling at Dave Inchcape and has the sudden realization that it's Politically Incorrect, nothing more than a hareem signal. Ms McKern had a lot of fun with those scenes in the television series' final set of episodes.
I stand by my twerp comment. Believe it or not, I was young once, and was somewhat of a twerp myself. Some wiser, older people told me in no uncertain terms that I needed to get over myself, and I eventually did.

Civility should always be the norm, but respect is something that is earned. LW needs to know that.
Sorry dude, but that whole thing about gay men being slutty being bad for the cause... that's just grist for the mill.

That's not the real reason that people who are anti-marriage equality are anti-marriage equality. Mostly they just think that gay sex is icky, gay men are weird, and anything gay is unmanly. Some of them see an opportunity to oppress a minority for political gain. Many (maybe even most) of them are hot for gay men, but have been conditioned to repress their feelings, and act out against what they desperately want but can't have with anger and hatred.

After all, you never hear the same arguments against *lesbians*. In fact, you rarely hear any arguments against lesbian marriage. The sex *they* have isn't weird and icky enough to get all worked up about.
I'll add a slightly different perspective here. I was in a monogamous relationship for 24 years, right up until the "death do us part" ending of it. Was it wonderful? Yes. Was it perfect? God no, but I wouldn't have had it any other way.

It wasn't what I was really looking for when that relationship started, but somehow monogamy just felt right and it worked for the two of us. I'm still healthy, relatively young (well at 52, I don't consider myself old yet). Will my next relationship be monogamous? It might be, but I don't view that as the gold standard anymore. I think in the context that SFMCN writes, he's talking about the physical/sexual aspect of monogamy, but the reality is that there's another, more important aspect to a relationship: the spiritual and emotional intimacy. That part is very important to me, but as far as the sexual part, meh, maybe not so much.
I generally don't mind the the use of "wanna". I'm in my 30s and I use this construct often when writing in a conversational mode, things like "Wanna go to the park?" or "Wanna make a difference?".

That said, that's a whole lot of wanna's, now that I look at it.
While I believe if a relationship is a healthy one, be it closed, open or whatever that's all that should matters. That being said it does suck for those of who are gay, single and want to be in monogamous relationships when a large portion of potentional partners tend to not have the same desire.
I'm glad to read Dan comment on this subject matter. I previously mistook his point of view as jaded and myopic rather than the refreshingly expansive explanation offered here. I've been out and proud for over 21 years. Most of that has been in the SF area and believe in the monogamy model. A lot of people do! It is not naive or "young republican" for anyone to have personal values. However, it is wrong to inflict them on others. Our personal lives should be just that - personal. I've seen a lot more happiness and success in the rare monogamous partnerships of myself and others than "committed open" ones so that remains my goal. I also respect that many have a different take. Either way - no one should be judged for whatever relationship they and their partner(s) decide to have.
I previously mistook Dan's point of view as jaded and myopic rather than the refreshingly expansive explanation offered here. I've been out and proud for over 21 years. Most of that has been in the SF area and believe in the monogamy model. A lot of people do! It is not naive, Christian or "young Republican" for me or anyone else to have personal values. I do quite well with them and they help guide me in making tough choices. However, it is wrong to enforce these ideals on others. Our personal lives should be just that - personal. I've seen a lot more happiness and success in the rare monogamous partnerships of myself and others than "committed open" ones so that remains my goal. I also respect that many have a different take. Either way - no one should be judged for whatever relationship they and their partner(s) decide to have.
I want to meet this kid, make him a ton of promises and cheat on him every chance I get and blame the nefarious Gay Community [thunderclap] for my nefarious ways.

Quick, everybody, here comes a hetero! Look straight!
I don't think that being hetero- or homosexual makes you more or less likely to be monogamous. I tend to think that it's more that gay couples would rather accept an open relationship than to have partners sneaking around on each other, and straight couples would rather feign monogamy and sneak around.
I carried the opinions of the LW for the first couple gay relationships I had, until I learned that, tho I could commit emotionally and forever to one man, I could not be satisfied seeing 'only him naked for the rest of my life'. So my 3rd relationship was started unequivocally as NON-MONOGAMOUS right up front. We both believe that if there is another man out there who makes our mate happier than we can, that is who they should be with. 20+ years later, we're still that person for each other.
LW- non-monogamous couples are as dedicated and committed to each other as monogamous ones. Sex has zippo to do with fidelity in a marriage. Good luck to you as a newly out gay man- you will find the way that's perfect for you, with the perfect man for you. I sure did.
Maybe the LW's difficulty in finding monogamous relationships is because people meet him and instantly think "Oh hell, no way you're the only person I'm fucking forever."
#67 ftw.
Wow, reading this letter was like hearing 19 year old me's thoughts. And 30 year old me still can't believe 19 year old me was that simple-minded. That being said, I've been "married" for years and been with my partner (I'm going to brag and tell you he resembles David Beckham) for nearly 8 years. We've had exactly 2 sorta-kinda-threesomes in 8 years. And they both involved massive amounts of drinks, massive amounts of trust, and massive amounts of revelations. The first being, threesomes are fun and an awesome time. The second being, threesomes are akward and interesting. And the last being, "wow, my husband is a superior lover. Thank god he puts up with me."

Don't worry kid, if you're anything like me, you'll meet really good friends who happen to be in open relationships, closed relationships, and tons of other types of relationships. And you'll see that it's not about you. It's about them and what they've found works well for them. Don't judge them, they're likely not judging you.
A thought on the stereotype that gay men are more likely to be in open relationships: they probably are. Being gay in today's world usually means having to overcome a sexual orientation that was pushed on you and deciding that you know what's best for you. Once someone makes this kind of choice, it becomes much easier to shed other social norms and sit down and really figure out what they want in life.

SFMCN, if the only reason open relationships seem unethical is because, well , they just are, then you could probably benefit from really thinking about this viewpoint a little. Because that's the same attitude that has millions around the world convinced that being gay is unethical. If you just don't want that for yourself, well good for you, I'm the same way, but that's about you and your preferences, not about other people.
Gay man. 35 years relationship. The "job" of dating is to find someone whose values match yours. Not interests, but values. And the "job" of relationship is to keep the communication up so that as one changes, the partner is aware and participating. Dan advocates that open relationships be put on the menu. Your option is not just monogamy (many), serial monogamy(Newt Gingrich and Zsa Zsa) and polyandry (Someone give me an example) or being single(Mother Teresa and Miss Palin). It is such a wonderful spectrum. And don't jump into a long term contract without the negotiations. (BTW, 35 years of monogamy on my side and probably on his.)
@3, I'll take you up on that quickie offer. As long as you don't live in MN I can do it because those are the rules in my open relationship. :)

Polyandry: Tilda Swinton.…
Personally, I think that self-control and non-monogamy should absolutely NOT be mutually exclusive concepts-- unless you want your relationship to crash and burn, that is. Self-control should be an important element of any adult relationship; I've been in an open marriage for 5 years now and while our rules are quite permissive, it is certainly not a free-for-all.
Hooper is articulate and all, but the anecdote about the phoned-in breakup before the kiss (My commitment to fidelity was stronger than my capacity to craft a tactful exit strategy) is ironic. He cites an example of being meaninglessly monogamous as a (mildly flawed) boon to his character. I do not think he is a bad guy, but what he did to preserve his commitment by a technicality was clearly a shitty thing to do. It is not the kind of behavior I would bring up as evidence that monogamy works. To me, it is an example of something the monogamish should bring up to point out the flaws in monogamy.
East Coast Douglas: Anorexia is not an example of self-control. Anorexic patients have lost control of themselves. It is only that it has manifested undereating rather than by overeating.

I used the word "promiscuity" because the letter-writer did. What I said was "promiscuity is bad and self-control is good," so no, I didn't happen to say that the two are mutually exclusive, but it is true:

Courtesy of, promiscuity means "indulging in casual and indiscriminate sexual relationships." Please note the "indiscriminate." So yes, someone who is promiscuous lacks self-control.
So a young man writes in and says, "I want a monogamous relationship" and the people on this thread go, "you're a twerp for wanting that," "you're hostile for wanting that," "you're forcing your values on us (by saying that you want that)" and "once you grow out this stupid little phase of yours you'll stop wanting that."

@77: Read his letter again. Slower this time.
Not to mention, I've seen some pretty horrible things result when ONE TRUE METHOD of relationships is, ah, religiously promoted. So while I sympathize with LW, when he wants Dan to preach the "right way" to do things... nope (specifically "I would hope someone like you would be more careful about what you say publicly.")

So, no thanks. I'm happy to live & let live. You wanna open relationship? Please go ahead. You wanna monogamous one? Please go ahead.

I will say that lying should be off the table, but that doesn't exclude open relationships, oddly enough.
@ 76 - Then by that dictionary's definition, I have never been promiscuous in spite of shagging with thousands of men, since I've always chosen who I wanted to have sex with (which is an example of... self-control!).

It's quite obvious that this definition needs to be revised.
@65: I think it may have to do with the reproductive implications in hetero relationships, and the social consequences of breaking them. Society laughs most scornfully at a man who is unwittingly raising another man's offspring (and by corollary frowns on a man who would do that to another family). They regard that man as unable to "keep" his wife. Men will tend to want avoid being tarred with this perception. Society also regards a woman who would let a man unwittingly raise another man's offspring as the worst sort of con artist.

That particular threat is all but non-existent in homosexual pairings. The only reproducing that is going to happen in that system will be deliberate and well-thought-out in advance. This makes sex outside the relationship a considerably less threatening proposition.

I've also heard it said (could have sworn it was Dan) that the reason is that men tend to regard cheating less disfavorably than women, as evidenced by their apparently higher rates of cheating; and when a relationship involves two men, that means both parties are somewhat more likely to not mind so much. It's not that they are gay, it's that they are both men.
@ 67 - Probably not yet, as he's still very young, but that's what happened to someone I know who took the sanctimonious route way back when.

He's now 40, single for 6 years, has been in therapy forever, has no sex life to speak of and is totally desperate to meet someone who shares his values, but he scares off every possible candidate with the way he imposes his values and judgment on them before even getting a chance to know them at all... even the ones who DO share his values. In the end, it's not his values that are wrong, it's his holier-than-thou attitude.

Beware, LW, that's what may end up happening to you.

Thanks for the thoughtful comment, I had to spend some time thinking about it. You are correct, the letter writer made the false equivocation of non-monogamy and promiscuity before you did. And you're right, promiscuity - as opposed to non-monogamy - os a failure of self-control.

But no, anorexia is not a failure of self-control to feed your body the nutrition it needs - undereating. Anorexics feel hunger just like anybody else, they feel it all the time. But through sheer will - self-control - they command themselves to ignore the signals of their bodies and their own natural instincts for self-preservation. Ever hear an anorexic speak of eating? The language is almost always self-disgust at their own weakness and failure of will.

I bring-up anorexia only as an example of how even the virtue of self-control can be twisted. Every virtue can be twisted any misused to the point of hurting others or self-destruction. Any virtue. Even monogamy.
20 years (and counting) of gay monogamy here.
People on this thread are calling this kid all sorts of names for saying he wants a monogamous relationship. If he were saying he wanted to be pegged or couldn't get an erection unless his partner was wearing Hello Kitty earmuffs, all you guys would be cheering him on to accept himself and his desires.

@77 I did, just 'cause you said so. I still see a kid who is talking about what he wants and expressing legitimate doubts about other people's choices. So what if he doesn't like it when monogamy is "made into a joke"? I imagine people in other types of relationships don't like being ridiculed either.

@76 Let's look up "indiscriminate": "lacking in care, judgment, selectivity," so a promiscuous person is someone who engages in a lot of sexual relationships and doesn't use care, judgment or selectivity when choosing partners. It doesn't mean that he/she doesn't choose the partners him/herself. Because I don't know you personally, I cannot say whether you are promiscuous or not. I stand by my earlier statements, "Promiscuity is bad" and "Promiscuity indicates a lack of self-control."

Too many people in this thread are reading WAY too much into this kid's letter. Maybe many of you have been subjected to hate speeches from jerks, but this is not one of those times. The views that this letter writer expresses are very moderate.
East Coast Douglas -- Anorexics might be resisting the calls of their bodies to eat, but they have failed to resist the psychological compulsion to refrain from eating. They cannot overcome their feelings of disgust about their bodies and perform the actions that are logically necessary for their health and survival.
It embarrasses me to think that I was once this young and opinionated. Luckily I never wrote a letter that would prove it for all time.

The LW is lucky that he wrote to Dan and got such a thoughtful response from both Dan and Jeremy. I, like so many of the other commenters, wouldn't have been so gentle.

I feel fortunate to be in a relationship with a man that I love dearly and am devoted to. I feel committed to him and his happiness and the health of our relationship. This is all a surprise to me. I'm 40 and have never been interested in monogamy or even being in a relationship. It wasn't until I met my boyfriend that I started thinking about things in the long term and learning the true benefits of forming a partnership with someone.

I feel trust and loyalty and respect and adoration for my boyfriend, all while still being attracted to other men. We're open, and I've never been happier.

It would never occur to me to tell some one how to run their relationship, and I find it offensive that some young idiot has the temerity to suggest that my relationship is superficial. But I've mellowed over the years and know that I'll get over it. I also think that in a few years this kid will pull his head out of the sand and think before he dashes of a plaintive letter. We'll all be better off for it.
@ 85 - I suppose you were answering my posting @ 80, so here goes:

I have had sex with thousands of men, but never "lacking care, judgment or selectivity" when choosing partners. My tastes are very precise, so I'm always selective, and I avoid nutcases and other potentiel sources of danger like the plague. I have always been in control of the situation, but I just made sure I didn't miss out on any good occasion.

I do believe that by anyone's standards, I am a promiscuous man. I have never lacked in self-control, though, as anyone who knows me could tell you. Therefore, your reasoning is dubious.
@ 85 - Also, having experimented promiscuity, which doesn't seem to be your case, I can also affirm that it is not at all bad (at least if you use condoms). It's what you make it.
@85: "I still see a kid who is talking about what he wants and expressing legitimate doubts about other people's choices."

You honestly don't see the logical inconsistency with what you just wrote? Give it a moment, it'll come to you.

Other people's choices are other peoples choices. Not his. If he gets to want what he wants, then other people get to want what they want. If he is going to characterize those other people's choices as "making monogamy into a joke" or "all open relationships are superficial" or "despising" Dan for daring to suggest that other people might be empowered to make choices different from his, he can expected to be called an idiot for it.

Live your own life, young padawan.
Letter Writer needs a copy editor. He could have said the same thing in a lot fewer words:

"A few years ago I saw a video on Youtube of you talking about monogamy and open relationships. Now that I am out I will soon be looking for a relationship. I'm scared that it will turn out that he also watched that video, and will want an open relationship, and I just can't handle that prospect. Dan, you have no business telling people that they get to make choices that might clash with what I want. For that, I despise you."
@88 Like I said, I don't know you, but I find it hard to believe that someone could have sex with "thousands" of people and still show good "judgement and selectivity." My take? If you see something that you want but shouldn't have and don't take it, then that's self-control.

As for whether or not promiscuity isn't bad, perhaps you'll forgive me for not taking your word for it. Maybe it isn't. Maybe it just wasn't for you. Maybe it was for you and you don't see fit to say so to a stranger during an argument about another stranger.

@90 Just because they're other people's choices doesn't mean he doesn't get to talk about them. Yes, there's a line. This kid isn't going around haranguing nonmonogamists with fire and brimstone. He's expressing reservations. What comes to me is that a lot of people on this thread have probably been harassed by conservative jerks and are projecting that justified anger onto a conservativish non-jerk.


>My take? If you see something that you want but shouldn't have and don't take it, then that's self-control.

"shouldn't have" according to who? Your grandma?

Clearly you are of the same mind, but the letter, and your silly, naive comments about "character" boil down to: "people are promoting and enjoying and proud of something I don't like and disapprove of! Stopitstopitstopit I hate you!"

You could keep trying to impress your conservative friends and/or family by making such a big deal about how hardcore monogamous you are or you could maybe, oh I don't know, get real.

"Shouldn't have" as in bad for the doer, bad for the partner, bad for the environment, bad for a third party, the list goes on.

So in other words, when I encourage this young man and suggest that he's not necesarily wrong/stupid/deluded for valuing monogamy you want me to stopitstopitstopit.

I do have a conservative friend or two, but neither I nor my family is conservative. As I said to LW in my first post, we should appropriate the good parts of conservative views rather than rejecting everything they say as necessarily wrong just because many of the other things that they say are.

In fine, if conservatives say, "Homosexuality is bad and monogamy is good," feel free to reject the "homosexuality is bad" and retain the "monogamy is good."
>So in other words, when I encourage this young man and suggest that he's not necesarily wrong/stupid/deluded for valuing monogamy you want me to stopitstopitstopit.

No one ever suggested he was any of those things for wanting to be monogamous, the disdain was aimed at the high horse he rode in on using words like "despise" and absolutes like "all non-monogamous relationships suck because I say so".

Monogamy is A-ok if it works for you.

Non-Monogamy is A-ok if it works for you.

As long as everyone involved in whatever relationship they are in are all clear about that relationship's definitions then one is not better than the other as you and the LW seem to suggest.
@95, actually, yes, a lot of people are here saying things like, "he only wants this because he's young/stupid/naive," to name the kinder ones. There is a level of vehemence in this thread that is entirely unmerited by this letter alone.

No one has said that anyone's better than anyone else. You guys are projecting that onto what LW actually said.

To paraphrase

Monogamest might be resisting the calls of their bodies to spread their sexuality far and wide, but they have failed to resist the psychological compulsion to limit their sexual expression.

Huh? Just goes to show that language can twist anything around on itself.

Anyway, this is not an anorexia forum and I am not going to beat a dead horse further. Especially as that horse is a metaphor for an allegory.

I would, however, humbly request that you google “anorexia and control.” Anorexia is not an disease of “feelings of disgust about their bodies” and it is not a semantic issue.

"I believe that all open relationships are superficial."

That's a direct quote from the letter. Did you by chance read it?
@ 92 - The fact that you and I do not share the same definition of "judgment" and "selectivity" doesn't mean that mine isn't good. You can't dismiss it just because you don't agree with it. Obviously, to you, those words mean "to repress oneself". To me, they mean "think before you act", and I always did.

And if you believe that I shouldn't have had sex with so many men because it is somehow not good, then all I read are your judeo-christian prejudices concerning what is good or not. I'm an atheist, so I don't follow this ridiculous (to me) so-called "moral" value system.

My analysis of those situations is based on some simple considerations: Is it good for me? Is it good for the other person(s)? Are there any victims?

If no one was hurt and no infection transmitted, what the fuck is bad about it?

If I made a conscious decision not to repress my sexual impulses because there was absolutely no reason to repress them, what the fuck is bad about it? What would I gain from repressing them? I'd just become bitter and envious for not getting laid enough. And where is the lack of self-control if it's a conscious, well thought-out decision?

And as I said, promiscuity is "what you make it". If it's not for you, fine. If someone enjoys it and isn't hurting anyone, fine. If you weren't so hung up on some supposedly moral principles, you might understand that: to each his own.

All I perceive from your comments is that you believe that if YOU don't repress your impulses, you'll be the least moral person in the world. And since it has left you unsatisfied with your life, well, you sure don't want anyone else to have more fun than you do!

Finally, we also disagree on the definition of conservative. You are extremely conservative. And judgmental. You expect everyone to obey your "moral" values, and tell them they're doing something wrong if they don't. Just like the LW. No wonder you're defending him: you share his self-righteousness.
ECD, sometimes one thing can be applied to another and sometimes it can't. I was talking about anorexics: Anorexics can resist the call of their bodies that tells them to eat but they've failed to resist the psychological compulsion not to eat. Anorexics feel an unhealthy compulsion to starve themselves and they fail to resist it. No, I do not believe that anorexics serve as an example of people WITH self-control.

@98 Yes I did. Let's break it down. He said "I believe," showing that he is expressing his own beliefs and opinions and "superficial," which is clinical and mild. No, he didn't say how much he loves nonmanogamy, but it's a far cry from meriting the insults that have been thrown his way. How else was he supposed to say it?

@99 I didn't dismiss anything about you. I just said that I don't know you and won't be taking your word for it. Were you planning on taking my word for it?

"If I made a conscious decision not to repress my sexual impulses because there was absolutely no reason to repress them, what the fuck is bad about it?"

You can certainly make the case that it's not bad, but it's not an example of self-control either. It's more like self-permission.

You are reading way too much into my posts. The only moral value of my own that I've expected people to obey is to NOT take a kid who wrote in to an advice columnist with an extremely mild critique of non monogamy and act like he's the biggest sexophobe who ever lived. Again, maybe you've encountered jerks who've treated you like crud, but I am not one of them. Stop projecting their cruelty onto me.
@96, you are right and you are wrong.

You are right that some folks have basically said he is naive for wanting monogamy. Not all that many overall, but yes, that's come through some of the posts.

You are wrong that no one has said that anyone is better than anyone else. The LW clearly was stating that monogamous relationships are better, and that people in open relationships aren't taking their relationships seriously:

" I don't see any loyalty in open relationships."

"I believe that all open relationships are superficial."

"Self control is all about knowing you can do something and deciding you won’t do it. Why you don’t promote that message, Dan, instead of promoting open relationships?"

He is clearly judging open relationships as inferior and outright bad.

And that is the reason that the majority are getting on his case, not that he wants to be monogamous.

The thing is, I kind of get his basic point, until he gets into the whole condemning others who don't share his ideals.

It IS a bit disheartening to be gay and monogamy minded and then have to navigate through a sea of potential partners who don't share that. It is hard enough being gay. No matter where you live, even if you live in San Francisco or NYC, being gay means having far more limited options than straight people. Finding someone who is gay, attractive to you, attracted to you, and who shares your values and ideas about relationships is freaking hard. When the majority seem to desire a form of relationship that just won't work for you, and you realize that your small range of options just got significantly smaller, it is very disheartening and depressing. The idea of trying to find what you actually want can seem completely futile. Seriously, just thinking of where he is coming from and how he is seeing his options and future is literally making me depressed because I have been there and I know what it is like.

And although I think that it is too easy to oversimplify what Dan says in this by watching short clips of his videos, and that Dan's ideas on these things are far more complex than "monogamy is a joke", the fact is that on first listen to Dan it does come across as if he is saying that. It is easy to get the message from Dan's comments in the past, as well as from the comments of many gay people, that monogamy really doesn't exist. That you either are going to have an open relationship or you are going to be cheated on and have an non-monogamous not by choice. That your only options is to just suck it up and give up any hope of having what you want because one way or another you are not likely going to have a truly monogamous relationship, and even less likely if you are gay.

I can hear what this kid is hearing, and I understand his frustration and depression over it.

Where I part company with him is in doing the same thing to others that he is doing. Dismissing their wants and needs and considering them as inferior.

There are definitely those out there, gay and straight, who make it out as if being monogamous is an antiquated and useless concept that people should just give up on. And there are people like the LW who say that open relationships are inherently inferior and bad. And both of those stances are wrong and clinging to them detrimental.

The LW needs to learn that he can want what he wants, legitimately, and pursue it without having to condemn those who don't share his views. What he is doing is seeing people who want open relationships as an obstacle to his happiness. If only they would just want what he wants then things would be much easier for him. And actually he is right, if everyone wanted what he wanted things would be easier for him. But this is reality and things aren't easy, and it isn't the obligation of others to make things easy by giving up what they want themselves to make him happy. I totally get where he is coming from, and feel for him, but he needs to drop the superior attitude and the condemnation. If for no other reason than that it is unattractive, and if he wants to ever find someone, and he is going to have a very small number of options because what he wants is not what the majority of his tiny range of options wants, he can't afford to drive away any of the few good potential matches with a bad attitude.

Rather than strategizing to try to make the most of a limiting situation he is whining about it, and that is just annoying to others and unproductive for himself.


>How else was he supposed to say it?

People have already given you plenty of examples of how he was supposed to say it, but you continue to ignore them.

How about "Not like an asshole". How about "I don't feel that non-monogamy is for me and am worried I will have a hard time finding a partner who shares that."

How about not "I despise you because I mis-interpreted a video you were in". How about not "I believe that all open relationships are superficial," which, no matter how you keep trying to spin it, is a judgmental and shallow absolute that will dictate how he treats others.

You're trolling aren't you?

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

    Add a comment

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.