Wait, if something is okay because it's common, should actual sexual assault be perfectly fine? If homosexuality was accepted by very few people, would it be wrong because of that?

As to the "pretend/reality" argument, it seems to consist of a very leading statement: This man has to actually have sex with his wife while she begs him to stop, as well. 'No' is actually being eroticized, even if a good 10th of the population does it regularly. To me, that is 'simply disgusting.'

So it seems to boil down to how many other people do it, but a relationship only has two people in it. (Or more, depending. But that's not really part of the point.)

Yes, I don't like this double standard either. There are lots of things I find disgusting, including some that Dan probably likes (sucking other guys' cocks is one of them); if I gave different advice to people interested in these things than I give to those who want the things I like, then what kind of an advice-giver would I be? The kind who tells gays they should 'get over it' because it's 'disgusting'?

I don't buy the frequency bullshit either. "Relatively frequent" -- what is that supposed to mean in reality? Isn't this just a variation on the old "it's unnatural!" theme that the Chrsitian right sings about homosexuality?

The guy who wants his wife to fart on his face has as much right to get that as the wife who wants her husband to indulge her rape fantasy -- no matter how much I find 'farting in the face' disgusting. My tastes align with Dan's on this one -- I'd rather indulge a rape fantasy than a fart one -- but that's me, not the guy asking for advice. If Dan takes his position as an advice columnist seriously, not simply as an entertainer of readers who come here for the 'freak show', then he should have told that reader that it was inconsiderate of his wife not to take his fetish into account. To again quote (or paraphrase) from Dan himself, a fetish is not something the fetishist can turn on and/or off at will.

I'm sure there are people who think it's exactly power-exchange fantasies that are disturbing -- much more disturbing and "dangerous" than mere fart fantasies. I'm sure a good argument could be made to defend that position. And I'm sure it would be wrong.

I'm afraid I have to tell you Dan: you behaved like a prejudiced Christian right-winger. "Kid, it's ugly to want to do unnatural things; if you have to, please spare your wife!" Tsk-tsk-tsk. I can almost hear you add: "Jesus doesn't want you to like farts!"

Yes, I don't like this double standard either. There are lots of things I find disgusting, including some that Dan probably likes (sucking other guys' cocks is one of them); if I gave different advice to people interested in these things than I give to those who want the things I like, then what kind of an advice-giver would I be? The kind who tells gays they should 'get over it' because it's 'disgusting'?

I don't buy the frequency bullshit either. "Relatively frequent" -- what is that supposed to mean in reality? Isn't this just a variation on the old "it's unnatural!" theme that the Chrsitian right sings about homosexuality?

The guy who wants his wife to fart on his face has as much right to get that as the wife who wants her husband to indulge her rape fantasy -- no matter how much I find 'farting in the face' disgusting. My tastes align with Dan's on this one -- I'd rather indulge a rape fantasy than a fart one -- but that's me, not the guy asking for advice. If Dan takes his position as an advice columnist seriously, not simply as an entertainer of readers who come here for the 'freak show', then he should have told that reader that it was inconsiderate of his wife not to take his fetish into account. To again quote (or paraphrase) from Dan himself, a fetish is not something the fetishist can turn on and/or off at will.

I'm sure there are people who think it's exactly power-exchange fantasies that are disturbing -- much more disturbing and "dangerous" than mere fart fantasies. I'm sure a good argument could be made to defend that position. And I'm sure it would be wrong.

I'm afraid I have to tell you Dan: you behaved like a prejudiced Christian right-winger. "Kid, it's ugly to want to do unnatural things; if you have to, please spare your wife!" Tsk-tsk-tsk. I can almost hear you add: "Jesus doesn't want you to like farts!"

Yes, I don't like this double standard either. There are lots of things I find disgusting, including some that Dan probably likes (sucking other guys' cocks is one of them); if I gave different advice to people interested in these things than I give to those who want the things I like, then what kind of an advice-giver would I be? The kind who tells gays they should 'get over it' because it's 'disgusting'?

I don't buy the frequency bullshit either. "Relatively frequent" -- what is that supposed to mean in reality? Isn't this just a variation on the old "it's unnatural!" theme that the Chrsitian right sings about homosexuality?

The guy who wants his wife to fart on his face has as much right to get that as the wife who wants her husband to indulge her rape fantasy -- no matter how much I find 'farting in the face' disgusting. My tastes align with Dan's on this one -- I'd rather indulge a rape fantasy than a fart one -- but that's me, not the guy asking for advice. If Dan takes his position as an advice columnist seriously, not simply as an entertainer of readers who come here for the 'freak show', then he should have told that reader that it was inconsiderate of his wife not to take his fetish into account. To again quote (or paraphrase) from Dan himself, a fetish is not something the fetishist can turn on and/or off at will.

I'm sure there are people who think it's exactly power-exchange fantasies that are disturbing -- much more disturbing and "dangerous" than mere fart fantasies. I'm sure a good argument could be made to defend that position. And I'm sure it would be wrong.

I'm afraid I have to tell you Dan: you behaved like a prejudiced Christian right-winger. "Kid, it's ugly to want to do unnatural things; if you have to, please spare your wife!" Tsk-tsk-tsk. I can almost hear you add: "Jesus doesn't want you to like farts!"

I know I'm super-late to this party from 2001... but, umm, where did Savage get the idea that the Jamaican guy gives off a "dominant" vibe? Was it in part of the letter we didn't read? Is Savage channeling how some readers respond to black men? Or did he turn a Freudian slip into a Freudian diatribe?

My mistake. Dominate was in the original post!

How does a guy eat his own jizz? Catch it in his hand and lick it off? My imagination hit a road block there...

Well, maybe he's lying down, or otherwise aiming so that it lands on his stomach. Then he could easily wipe it off his body with his hand, and suck it off of his fingers.

Agreed, one swift fart to the face sounds a lot simpler than having to memorize a rape script while the other person lays there pretending to have a horrible time.

Me, I'd classify fart fetish (though rare and hilarious) even tamer than rimming.

I'm pretty sure I understand why Dan gave such different advice in those two cases, and "ew gross!" jabs aside, I don't think his advice shows a double standard. The difference is that the rape guy was writing to complain that his wife had a fantasy that HE didn't want to fulfill. Dan's advice was to man up and give the wife what she wanted, which is pretty consistent with what he tells everyone who complains about their spouse's kinks: either give your spouse what they need, or allow them to get it elsewhere. The reason he didn't spell out the "or let her get it elsewhere" part this time was that the guy admitted to being bored with the routine sex as well, and Dan supposed that giving the wife what she wanted would solve that problem - kill two birds with one stone.

The fart guy, on the other hand, was writing to complain that his wife didn't want to fulfill HIS fantasy. So Dan's advice was the same thing in reverse: if your wife doesn't want to do it, get it elsewhere (and pay the nice lady). Almost every letter Dan gets falls into one of the two categories, the advice is always the same, and I for one think it's right on the money. It doesn't matter what kink we're talking about; the only difference is that the tamer the kink, the easier it will be on your wallet.

Wow, we didn't have spell check in our Web browsers in 2001. How did we live?!

I hope we don't get grammar check any time soon. How will we know who the idiots are if they can't mix up "they're" and "their?"

^ Oh, they'll find a way to let us know... Like people who use caps lock as an artistic flourish or something- LikE ThIs. Clearly their shift/caps lock isn't stuck, since they alternate randomly, so whyyyy????