SL Letter of the Day: Bi Enough


But did she make it clear to him that she only wants sex and not a relationship? She has to be sure he realizes there's no chance at all, none whatsoever. Even if she's unsure about it, if she wavers or gives the "well, I don't want a relationship right now, but I don't know for sure... er, ah..." then he'll be secretly hoping she'll change her mind and will wait around and be lead on. She's got to convince him there's no chance.

Once that's clear, then have fun!
He sounds like the one that needs advice. You just like the sex. Poor guy is going to get his heart broken.
She just doesn't want to admit she wants him.

Biology does strange things to our brains. Ask yourself what you think about a month after the date you both went on the camping trip.
Oh no! You mentioned Bailey! Brace yourself for the vitriol.
Yeah, you used him, now throw him away before he starts to mold.
I feel sorry for this poor guy. She should let him go so that he can find a woman that is actually attracted to him.

As Dan says, if she has been honest with him about her desires, she isn't obligated to break it off. But if she has any consideration for his feelings, it is the ethical and moral thing to do.
God, that was a hot story! I hope that happens on the next season of Grey's, haha!

Ahem. I bet she's glad she said yes to that trip! Great response as usual.
@1 - Is there really, honestly "no chance, ever?" (For what? Marriage? Her to turn straight? Something else?)

I mean, if you'd asked the LW before the camping trip, she'd have said there was no chance ever that she'd ever have any sex with a man. Never say never, and all that. Who says these two can't find their own balance?

LW, it's good that you want to be ethical and kind (and enjoy whatever is available.) How about going ahead and doing that without worrying too much about what it all means. The reality is that life can be very long, and you don't know yet how it all unfolds, or what any given person is going to wind up meaning in your life after years have gone by.

If there's one thing I've learned, it is that the people who really count--the ones who stay in my life, the ones who are there for me when times are bad--are almost never the ones I would have predicted.

When you connect with someone and they're willing to accept you and you them, that's a gift, whatever your wind up calling the relationship, whoever else you love or get hot for.

The rules are still being written about what human beings can be for one another. You both get to write the rules that work for you, and sometimes a person you meet is so special that it's worth moving the fences around more than you might have thought you'd ever want to.

Good luck!
OK, so I'm still confused from the post on The Kids Are Allright yesterday, and this is adding to my confusion. This sentence in particular: "you're clearly not so bi that you're disqualified from identifying as a lesbian."

so what's the point of calling someone a lesbian if they get to also be "bi" enough to get off on head from a guy? apparently her "lesbian" friends wouldn't agree that she's a lesbian. If a guy gets drunk and enjoys some head from another guy but wouldn't date him the next day, does he get to say "I'm clearly not so bi that i'm disqualified from identifying as straight"?

Yeah, this guy wants more than a fuckbuddy, so trying to maintain a relationship of that nature is bad news all around.
Coming out of lurking because that study that everyone loves to cite when trumpeting women's sexual "fluidity" or "bisexuality" also had something that people conveniently leave out. Women also got slightly aroused watching monkeys fucking. So, if we're going to say that because women can become aroused watching all manners of human combinations fucking means women are more sexually fluid/bisexual than men then what does it mean when women are also aroused by watching primates get it on? Even that researcher says; "There's the possibility that genital response for women is not necessarily imbued with meaning about her sexual interests," says Chivers. She also emphasized that her findings do not imply women harbor a latent desire for lesbian sex or bestiality.

But no one talks about that study. There was another visual arousal study done around that same time, that I cannot find the original report damnit, where another researcher theorized about this arousal pattern wasn't that women were bi-sexual but that women had evolved a response to become easily aroused because of possible rampant rape. You needed to get wet quickly so that you wouldn't damage your vaginal canal and so women developed an ability to become aroused at all manners of sexual stimuli. But that's not as sexy as "all teh womenz are bi!" people love to cite these studies for.
She is not into him because he is not a raging asshole like the her ex that abused her. This happens all the time to people with traumatic pasts. Their mind plays games and keeps them only attracted to more abusers. I don't think the lesbian angle changes any of that.
@13 might have something there.
Is it really absolutely necessary that everyone fit into a category?

If other lesbians are going to punish this woman for finding out that she's more complex than she thought, they are being almost as full of shit as a straight world that won't accept her being gay. Yes, I understand that it's more complicated, that there are political and cultural aspects, but still, jeez, let her be.

My advice to her would be to continue being as honest as possible with both him and herself, and see what happens. What happens will inform what to do.
Unless things are made crystal clear, this situation will violate the Campsite Rule. How can she leave him in better condition than when she found him when she knows that they both want different things? She is in it for the physical, he for the emotional. She'll get hers and he'll be left with nothing.

I've been this guy before and I was able to lie to myself thinking that over time she would come around even though that wasn't the agreement going into it. It ended badly. Yes it was my fault for hoping.

This poor guy is going to be used up like a crusty towel at a gang-bang shoot.
So the lesbian writes her letter to Dan Savage and the straight guy writes his letter to Penthouse.

Here's my problem and it's one that I've had for a while. If I've got a straight friend and they come out to me as gay I would be expected to support them. If I didn't support that decision I would be labeled (rightly so) as a narrow minded homophobe. However, it seems that any gay person that says that they're interested in fucking someone of the opposite sex is ostracized, often being kicked out of their group of friends for going straight. See this letter & the movie Chasing Amy for examples.

If she got shit for coming out as gay you would give the advice to tell her homophobic friends to fuck off. Why shouldn't she tell her equally narrow minded lesbian friends to fuck off?
@ 10, "bi" means capable of having LTRs with same- and opposite-sex partners, not being attracted or having sex with members of both genders. Lots of people have hang-ups with this, but that's the way it is.
She is certainly entitled to continue the relationship as long as she's honest with him.

At some point, though, if this guy is totally in love and stuck and unable to move on and establish a more satisfying relationship with a woman who is fully available, "dumping" him would be the nice thing to do. I've seen people who've been unable to extract themselves from a casual relationship that wasn't going anywhere, and while they are responsible for themselves, they sometimes need help.

huh??? so being "bi" is based on who you're willing to have LTR's with, and being "gay" is based on who you want to fuck? but the writer said she's a little "bi" because she got off with him, but since she's a "lesbian" she doesn't have any LTR feelings, or even STR feelings apparently.

my only hangup, so to speak, is with these confusing labels.

@12: Women also got slightly aroused watching monkeys fucking

Dude! You are totally giving away my secret foolproof method for seducing women.
Bi, lesbian, straight - only you can define yourself, DIRNAA. No one else can do that for you.
Um, who goes on a two week backpacking trip without bringing their own fucking camping pad? Looks to me as though at least one of you had intentions of snuggling before the trip even started - of course, that doesn't really answer the question at hand.

I read the letter and see a lot of rationalization as to why you can't be with a man - you sort of aren't aroused by him, hurtful experiences in the past, peer-group shame, etc. Part of me thinks these are excuses for you to conveniently avoid what you really want to do: have mind-blowing orgasms in between deep heart-to-heart conversations with him (sounds suspiciously like a relationship). But, only you can know that. Of course he's "ok with all" of your conditions - he's hoping you'll come around to having the same feelings for him that he has for you. You have to decide whether you think you ever can/will and then tell him very clearly one way or the other. Feel free to continue the relationship in any capacity, but if you truly aren't going to be in a place where you can ever reciprocate his feelings, this most likely won't end well for him and you might want to think about getting your jollies somewhere else.

Campsite rule, please.
what's the ethical thing to do at this point? He's very much infatuated, which honestly is very flattering. I think he's a really cool guy, and I want to be friends with him. But is that motivated simply by my desire to keep having fantastic orgasms?

The ethical thing to do is tell him that it's highly unlikely that you'll ever be interested in him for anything more than friendship and occasional fantastic orgasms. He might be fine with that. If, however, he ends up become more and more infatuated and really falling for you, expecting more, then you might need to break off the friendship.
It seems like Dan has a hard time believing in bisexuality.
@18 - Surely you pulled that definition of "bi" out of your ass.

According to every English dictionary ever written, "bisexual" means being sexually attracted or responsive to both sexes. Nothing in there about LTRs.
I dunno. Attraction is what it is. But I also understand a person's reluctance to change the way you have previously thought of yourself. Maybe the "forbidden" quality adds to the intensity of the orgasms too. Or is this guy just THAT GOOD at oral sex?

Honestly, I don't have many organized thoughts about this situation, and I hyperfocused on just one part of it. I really think that she needs to get some kind of counseling to deal with her residual issues before she even really examines the current situation too closely. There was an awful lot of pain packed into just a couple of lines of text in that letter. If brushing elbows is enough to flip her out, there is a lot more going on here than just a little unexpected sexual attraction. Those "severely traumatic" experiences with men? They should probably be unpacked with a trained therapist. Seriously.

And maybe new friends. She might need new friends. Because she's upset and confused and kinda freaking out, but her bigger worry is that they're going to give her shit. Who needs that?
If he's very much infatuated, the ethical thing to do is to not have sex with him for a while (like six months). If his infatuation hasn't cooled down by then, just remain friends (if he's able to do that). If it has cooled down, resume that mind-blowing orgasm thing. Life is long. Six months is a short time, even though it may not seem like that at the beginning.

And I agree with post 17: tell anyone who ostracizes you for this to fuck off. It's your body.
Why is everyone so worried about the guy? He's getting no strings attached sex from a lesbian who wants him sexually anyway, its like the ultimate dream scenario for guys isn't it? A lot of inexperienced women misread a guy's interest as meaning they have stronger feelings than they actually do. She's advertised herself as a lesbian and been straightforward with him at every step of the way, I'm sure the guy is just fine with the situation.
@17, sometimes people underestimate their friends.... sometimes based on stereotypes, such as that gay people will reject a friend who starts dating an opposite-gender partner (see "chasing amy"). I don't know the LW, but I'm a lesbian with mostly lesbian friends. I would bet my life that if I started dating a man, my friends would not reject me. They would definitely make fun of me and ask strange and inappropriate questions about my sex life. But what kind of friends would ditch someone based on who she's attracted to? If her assessment is true, my advice would be to get new friends.
tl;dr: @17, I agree with you. I just think the LW might be wrong about her friends.
@ 30 - "A lot of inexperienced women misread a guy's interest as meaning they have stronger feelings than they actually do".

Very good point. I would remove "inexperienced" and add "and gay men", though. I don't think it's so much out of inexperience,but rather out of a need for an ego boost of some sort (doesn't she say it's flattering?).
"Help me Dan Savage, you're my only hope"

Thank you for the great Star Wars plug there - worth reading every word
@ 12: "but that women had evolved a response to become easily aroused because of possible rampant rape. You needed to get wet quickly so that you wouldn't damage your vaginal canal..."

wow. kind of like that theory of how women talk so much more than men because they used to use their voices for constant chatter while out gathering berries and things in groups, while the men were out hunting, to hopefully keep large animals away. i call nonsense.
The LW should also remember that it's possible to be emotionally & sexually interested in/ attracted to someone without being totally smitten with their actual physical form. Frankly, I've been totally turned off looking at a guy naked because his physical body wasn't anything to write home about. However, that didn't mean I wasn't VERY hot for that person, excited by being with them and GGG. And, of course, if her past experiences were negative/traumatic, her distaste for the sight may be as much Pavlovian as anything else.

Either way, that doesn't mean she should write this guy off already if she really is emotionally interested AND very sexually responsive. (Unless she has zero desire to satisfy his needs as well, of course.)
Should we abolish the word, concept, and institution of "lesbian"? I have heard so many stories about lesbians who suddenly "are not", and straigh women who suddenly "are", and lesbians who "just like a little dick once in a while". It appears there is no such thing as a lesbian. Women can be either straight or bisexual. Period.

Am I being offensive?
The last paragraph made me LOL.
In other words, looks like a 5 on the Kinsey scale to me, eh?
@10's last sentence: Yes.
Re: "amazing superpowers of sexuality fluidity..." For some odd reason I was struck with the analogy of certain versatile engines that are capable of running on everything from jet fuel to cooking grease.

I suppose that's just the way my male mind works.
I hope she at least reciprocated and gave him a BJ. Then again, probably all the better if she did not. After two weeks on a backpacking trip, I bet he had some serious ball stench.
@ 41: but i bet her pussy tasted like roses.
So she was presumably straight identified for awhile, had a bad break up that was psychologically scarring, decided she didn't like men any more, became a lesbian, and now met a nice guy and wants to keep fucking him? Sounds to me like she's just getting over her bad break up and starting to see men as individuals and not just the guy who hurt her. And she certainly sounds like she cares about this guy a lot, wondering if she's capable of returning his feelings and worried about hurting him. Seems to me like she should just go for it, be happy, and worry about her identity later.
Sure, there might be a chance, but if she's unsure of her feelings right now, then the nicest thing she can do for this guy is to tell him there's no chance at all. She might change her mind later, but she shouldn't tell him that until she actually changes her mind.

By telling him in no uncertain terms that there's no chance at all, she'll avoid leading him on.
Question 1: Is this the best sex you've ever had?

Question 2: Are you, for the first time, having a friendship, potentially a relationship, with a man that is not negative, awkward or uncomfortable?

Question 3: Are you monogamous or polygamous?

Question 4: While not turned on by his body, are you repulsed by his body?

Question 5: Were your past experiences with men unfortunate because of the fact that they were males or because of the individuals that they were? If all you've had, before this, is negative experiences with men then it is natural to generalize with respect to all men.

I don't question your sexual orienation, but that doesn't mean you can't explore the boundaries of your sexuality. No one, including your lesbian friends, has the right to dictate to you what you can and can not do. Where is the harm as long as he does not have any expectations, is willing to accept your limitations and uncertainty, and you remain open and honest with him. This may be the first, possibly only male that you will ever feel safe and comfortable enough with to talk to about things that you can't talk about with you lesbian friends. Ultimately it is for you to decide who and what you are.
Oh labels. Queer is my favorite. Why don't more people use it?
30/Karey: Why is everyone so worried about the guy? He's getting no strings attached sex from a lesbian who wants him sexually anyway, its like the ultimate dream scenario for guys isn't it? A lot of inexperienced women misread a guy's interest as meaning they have stronger feelings than they actually do.

True. But a guy's interest in a woman can also mean that he does have strong feelings.

I tend to agree with you; he's probably fine with the situation as it is. But you never know (and you can never know from letters like this.) He may think she's a very cool person in all respects and genuinely be falling for her.
You said exactly what I would have said. Nice.
A wise man once said to me, "A bisexual is just a homosexual who's too polite to say No."

Of course, it's not generally applicable. But for my exboyfriend who was in the room and for me, it totally fit. We looked and each other and laughed.

I can get busy with women but I only fall in love with men so: I'm gay, not bi.

Then there was Judith, a sweet woman who offered herself to me. I said, No, Judith, I'm gay. To which she replied, That's OK, I'm bi! Still, honey... not clear on the concept.

I don't have a point; I'm just sharin'.

@21 Dan likes to be able to tell "straight" boys who like to get their dick sucked by a guy or do a little dick sucking themselves that they can still identify as straight, it would be difficult for him to turn around and tell this girl she can't still identify as lez

@37 yes, yes you are. deliberately so. and I'm betting you know that. still, I've never been attracted to or interested in guys, but then I'm butch so I probably don't fit your definitions. plus you don't sound like someone who has any lesbian friends or acquaintances ( "I have heard so many stories..." not "I know so many lesbians..."). what was my point again? oh, right, if it doesn't apply to you or affect you in any way then fuck off
@ 21, no, gay also means being able to have LTR's with the same sex.

@ 27, this is about self-identification, not clinical definitions. Now please stop cluttering up slog with your WiS-like comments.
I think we all need a far more detailed and precise description of the various acts of cunnilingus that occurred that led to the screaming orgasms. At least a 1000 words. Any appraisals and explicit appreciations of said orgasms would be optional, but encouraged.

I'm a fellow lesbian gone bi, and just amicably ended my first relationship with a bisexual guy.

My advice is to just relax and see where it goes. You're not getting involved with all men or renouncing future relationships with women. You just happen to like this particular guy who provides you with great conversation, fantastic orgasms, and seems to adore you. What's wrong with that? Despite the weirdness of the situation, both of you seem to be communicating well and treating each other with respect. It's okay to be confused or ask for time to figure things out. Try to let this relationship progress or fail based on how you connect as people, and not based on gender or orientation. Only time will tell whether you two work best as friends, friends with benefits, or lovers.

There's no need to come out to your friends or announce the new relationship (whatever form it settles into) unless/until you feel ready. All my friends (straight and queer) were very supportive when I started dating a guy and spent a year figuring out where I felt most comfortable along the dyke/bi/queer spectrum. There are plenty of other lesbian and lesbian-identified women who've ended up happily dating or even partnering up with men.

Good luck to both of you!
It's nice to have descriptive words like "gay," "straight," "bi," and others to be able to categorize how you feel romantically or sexually. The only thing is that sometimes, they're not descriptive enough.

People like what they like, and we'd be a lot happier if we just accepted what we liked angst-free. Fuck who you want, DIRNAA, and stop worrying about what your mean friends will think.
if it's about self identification and not clinical definition, why are you defining conditions that apply to other people? kinda defeats the point of "self identification" if you're defining "bi" in a pretty clinical way.

so chill out at the guy who rightly pointed out that you're pulling definitions out of your ass. by saying "lots of people have hangups with this, but that's the way it is", you're going beyond self-identification and laying down definitions that other people apparently have "hangups" with if they don't agree with your view.
As far as your friends go, their opinion is irrelevant. The only people who get to have input into your sex life are the people who are in bed with you. If they are going to give you shit about your sexual orientation, they aren't your friends, and they are no better than the bigots who insist that being lesbian is a sin.

I would worry about the level of the relationship between the two of you, however. It is clearly an unequal level of investment from each of you. He has fallen hard for you, while you think he'd be a great friend. You aren't actually aroused by his body, but he is aroused by yours, which is part of why he is so eager with that talented tongue of his, which you are willing to let him keep using on you despite your lack of reciprocation.

Eventually the newness and excitement will wear off for both of you, at which point the disparity in investment will become painfully apparent. You will want to start spending your time and energy on someone that you are actually attracted to, while he will realize that he has been putting all his energy and desire into someone who doesn't desire him back, who hasn't desired him back the entire time, and who probably never will ever desire him back. The disillusionment will hit pretty hard. He will feel like shit for being a blind lovestruck rube, and like a con man's mark for letting you use him. You will feel like shit for using him -- which is, let us be clear, exactly what you are doing. You are letting someone that you don't actually desire get you off because he is good at it. When it falls apart painfully, you can add this one to your list of traumatic experiences with men.

If he has fallen hard for you, as you suspect, then he is not being honest with himself about the state of the relationship. You owe it to him to be absolutely honest about how you feel. (Especially the part about not finding him arousing, which is the likeliest candidate to metastasize into a deal-breaker over the long term. Having a sex partner who finds you not arousing is a self-esteem shredder.) If the two of you can successfully convert the relationship to a mutual friends-with-benefits situation, go wild. But it isn't fair to keep stringing someone along who has fallen in love with you, when you don't love them back.

All of that said, however, you complicate the question further by saying you are less sure about your own feelings towards him. This sounds like maybe you are beginning to love him -- and thus the whole unequal investment scenario does not apply -- and all of your reservations are tied up in being worried about what your friends will say. In that case, see paragraph 1, relax and let yourself finish falling in love, do your best to be good to the guy, and enjoy your relationship.
Dan's answer was written from DIRNAA's perspective -- is she 'sufficiently bi' to enjoy this relationship, is she lying to herself as a lesbian, etc. -- which is good and important. She is the one who wrote the letter. But, having been in a similar situation which left me quite scarred, I'm afraid of the possibility of harm for the guy in question.

I hope she is being 100% sincere with him with respect to what might or might not happen, and that he's not operating (as I was) under the illusion that something will eventually change. I mean, it is true that people do change; and the possibility that he may end up with more than a friends-with-benefits relationship with DIRNAA is not 0%. It's been known to happen, as many people will tell you. But the chance that he might come out of it feeling (correctly or incorrectly) stupid, inadequate, insufficient, useless, depressed, or at least sad and unhappy, is not insignificant. I hope he is aware of that. (He may be, and still want to take his chances. Which would be another story. Even though the sadness and depression at the end might hurt just as badly...)
"Help me, Dan Savage, you're my only hope." - classic.
"Lesbians and straight men can be friends... and they can be friends with benefits. Enjoy."

@ 55. this is what bi and gay and straight mean in this context. I hope you can understand that, but the person who writes a nonsensical sentence like

if it's about self identification and not clinical definition, why are you defining conditions that apply to other people?

isn't likely to get this.
@ 18, 21, 27, 51, 55:

You can be sexually attracted to a different group of people than you would want to date. It is possible to be sexually attracted to men and women but still only be emotionally or romantically interested in women. A woman like that would be sexually bi and romantically lesbian. She could freely call herself bi, or lesbian, or queer, and still be correct: these terms are very flexible.
@60: You're mansplaining.

Nobody appointed you the word police and you especially don't get to, as a dude, tell us what the fuck being a lesbian means.

@16 Last I checked, the campsite rule, while a laudable goal in general, was really designed for situations where one party was noticeably older/more experienced than the other. I think Dan's advice is spot on.
@60 interesting given that the word was coined by a man, may be you should use saphite as a more appropriate alternative
I really love the third definition of mansplain in the urban dictionary

A meaningless term used by small-time radical feminists on Internet blogs. Essentially utilized as a way to shut down any male- or person they perceive as male- who dares to express an opinion that differs even slightly from their own warped version of reality. Even the fymynysts are unsure of exactly what it's supposed to mean- only that it has the word "man" in it and therefore must be bad and evil.
I've always thought of terms like 'bi', 'gay', 'straight', and 'queer' as vague terms which are helpful in giving me a very rough idea of someone's leanings; useful, but only so far as I'm not trying to be a part of those leanings. As the argument here shows, different people mean different things when they use those terms. A comment from some dude from Denver certainly isn't authoritative on the matter.

My take on the matter is that someone who identifies as 'straight' is probably a 2 or less, someone who identifies as 'bi' is probably between 1 and 5, and someone who identifies as 'gay' is probably a 4 or higher (all numbers referring to the Kinsey scale). People will use the terms, varyingly, to describe their ability to be attracted to, to have actual sex of some sort with, to have LTRs with, and to legally marry (/domestic partner/commitment ceremonize/...), people of one or the other sex (sticking to the binary for now to ease the explanation, please excuse it), and they may or may not be correct about themselves.

Every definition I've ever run into tends to define them in terms of attraction, and leave all of the various caveats and nuances for people to fill in for themselves. If you're having trouble, I'd suggest experimentation as the most fun way to learn more.

All of that aside, to suggest that the term 'bi' only means 'being capable of having LTRs with people of either sex' is to ignore the evidence right here. You can't have that argument and win; the fact that there is argument proves you wrong.

really, dude? "nonsensical"? all i did was point out the fact (which others have noticed) that you came in here and pulled some random definition of "bi" out of your ass. you didn't say anything about "context".

i know the LW was trying to use the labels in the context of her own personal experience. but if we all get to define "straight", "gay", or "bi" for ourselves (self-identification as you put it) then that pretty much invalidates the words as identifiers.

so you can't just throw the idea of context out suddenly and get to pretend like that's what you were saying all along. and failing to understand my ideas then pulling that old internet commentor trope of "if you say this, you obviously won't understand what I'm saying" is pretty weak sauce. that's something cocky 16 year olds do.
Too bad J. Michael Bailey isn't actually a bona fide and respected scholar, or else peer review could really support that response to DIRNAA.
There was a made-for-TV movie about a gay guy and a straight woman who fell in love and no one was happy about it. This included the straight woman's ex-boyfriend, the gay guy's ex-boyfriend and his fag hag. At the end of the day, both just shrugged and got on with the relationship. Here's the good bit - it's a true story (more of less) based on the writer's friendship with the original couple. The (real-life) couple are married with kids and happy and STILL TOGETHER. It's called "Bob and Rose" and it's really a charming film.

I guess sometimes love is just love, no matter what.
I recommend "Sexual Fluidity: Understanding Women's Love and Desire" by Lisa Diamond. It can be a little dry at times, but it's an excellent study/discussion of how women's desire tends to be more situational than men's (e.g. falling in love with the person rather than the gender), which is why a straight woman who's been happy dating men her entire life can have a relationship as a woman, but still feel that "straight" is the correct orientation for her, or a lesbian can have a relationship with a man and still feel that "bi" is an inaccurate classification for her.
It's true what they say then: lesbians are the way they are because they haven't met the right man yet. ;-)

Dan's advice is great as usual, but my preference in situations of unequal interest/experience is to tread VERY lightly. This guy sounds like a keeper, but I'm not sure you should be having sex with him unless you are sure he knows the score. And make doubly sure he is not lying to himself as well. I know, I know, he is an adult, and responsible for himself and all, but it is nicer to be overly careful with his feelings in such a situation.

12. You read the same study I did. DAN: The women in the studies were not aroused by every situation they looked at; they were only physiologically aroused. If asked, they only reported being interested in images that were typical for their sexual orientation. Are their bodies lying? In a way they are, or maybe the studies should ask the brain about arousal and not the body, at least when it comes to women.

BTW, super hot story.
@71, re "It's true what they say then: lesbians are the way they are because they haven't met the right man yet. ;-)":

No more true than "straight girls are the way they are because they haven't met the right girl yet." Which is to say, true in plenty of cases but certainly not all (for some highly unknown value of 'plenty'.) Both sides of the coin are probably true for more guys than you'd suspect as well; 'straight' society tends to be more comfortable with gay women than gay men, and if you look at societies without the same hang-ups, male fluidity seems to abound as well.

Just my opinion. I'm sure there are better ones out there.
Lemme see,

She obviously won't let him have intercourse with her and likely will not suck him off, so the main pleasures he is getting out of the arrangement are probably some hand jobs (which she's plainly grossed out about) and the opportunity to give her orgasmic oral sex.

Now I'm not discounting the enjoyment a guy gets from giving a woman oral sex (it's one of the things that I love to do with my wife whenever we make love), but the guy in question will grow tired of this arrangement pretty soon.

If she's not Bi enough to really meet his sexual needs then the arrangement is doomed anyway. 'nuff said.


For the OP: assholes aren't born, they're made. The man invited you (a stranger) to wander along uninhabited/sparsely inhabited sections of the country with him, far away from hospitals and rescue workers and all of the things that make life safe. He trusted you enough to not worry about whether you'd just drive off after the first night, he trusted you enough to have no problems sharing a tent with you, he trusted you enough to not snap like a twig and stab him in the throat in his sleep while you yell "I hate the cock, I hate the cock!", he trusted you enough to not run immediately to the closest police station (post- return to civilisation) with a claim of rape and he's *still* content with giving you large amounts of physical pleasure with little to nothing in return.

In case it's gone completely over your head: He. Likes. You. He likes being with you, he likes pleasing you, he's happy that you're in his life in some way, shape or form. And you're stringing him along by allowing him to have enough intimacy with you to cement the idea of mutual affection. If you aren't willing to learn how to stop worrying and love the cock, let him go before he decides that you're his "one and only" and does something to embarrass the both of you. Believe me, BTDTBTT (on both sides of this equation). Your (eventual?) rejection is either going to turn him into a grade-A farm fresh asshole/douchebag, or he's going to become one of those creepy hermits that you see in Western-style movies that shuns all human contact. Either way, you'll be depriving a lot of available straight and bisexual women of a

relationship-capable (he's sticking with you, isn't he?)

outdoorsy (adventurous *and* able to survive without being underfoot all of the time!)

fit (goes along with outdoorsy)


*employed* (can't forget the money!)



man who eats pussy well enough to make an avowed lesbian come back for seconds. And for what, your mercurial physical affections and the buffering that his attentions give to your ego?

Bottom line: Unless this guy's chosen name is Subby Femdomlover (and/or he's only about eating your pussy with no true concerns about his own pleasure), let him go. Put on your "Woman Drawers", decide whether you could see yourself doing anything more with him than being his punani-pleasing sparring partner, then either open your "doors" and give the cock another shot or let him down easy and give him the number of a woman who'd appreciate his talents.