Snooping is an act of dis-trust.

If any 'bad news' is discovered while snooping then the ill-trust is retroactively justified not the snooping.

Just because you have a valid reason to not trust someone does not give you a valid reason to invade their privacy.

At last! I've seen "squick" in print! My wife and I hve been using it for years, I've even forgotten the refrence to it, but I'm glad we are not the only ones!

Okay. My gf was cheating on me before she moved in with me. I confronted her and she admitted it. She begged me not to dump her and promised she wouldn't do it again. About a year after she moved in with me she began acting erratically and wouldn't talk about what the problem was. There is mental instability in her family and I became concerned about her mental health, but she refused to seek professional/medical help. She decided to go visit some college friends. I woke up in the middle of the night with a profound sense of dread and read the most recent entries in her journal. Something I had never done before because I trusted her and respected her privacy. Turns out not only did she not end her prior relationship, but had begun a new one within six months. The person she was visiting was her second lover. I had raised the issue of an open relationship several times before and after she moved in, which would have altered the dynamics of our relationship. She was adamant on mutual exclusivity. Now I don't question that she had every right to take another lover, but I had made it clear that if she did it would be the end of our relationship. So did her right to privacy trump my right to honesty?

A further question, is it snooping if you are concerned about a loved one's health, safety, and well being? Then there are always the issues of child pornography or other criminal acts. Does an individual's right to privacy exist when their activities are putting you and your family at risk? For every argument against snooping I could probably come up with a example that justifies it.

@100. Absolutely.
I had to snoop the old-fashioned way (before emails and testing), and didn't drag it out in front of my 14 year old daughter so that she would be humiliated that I had read her confidential papers, but did I use the knowlege I had gained to parent her into slightly different directions, ask slightly more direct questions until she knew that I knew what was happening? You bet I did. And would again. And I think that she is better off for it. Young teens can make rash decisions, and they can also believe that you can just 'read' their behaviour. No need to humiliate or be too direct, but no need to allow them to go down a recognizably dangerous path unaware either.

Most the men I know who wear 'feminism' on their sleeve have a secret misogynistic streak. It's a man's actions that show the real deal, not a man's words. I'm a feminist, and sometimes I have fantasies about being taken by force sexually by a man. I've enjoyed that with men in the past who would roll play that with me. Those men I knew were very female positive, and I knew that from their actions not from their words. The GF in the letter doesn't sound like much fun, but she may be reacting to some misogynistic stuff that she senses in her BF, who knows?

I'm so glad what I was thinking was already said by #3. If you identify yourself as a "feminist male", you've already turned in your man-card and will never have fun ever again, especially in bed. Fantasy != reality, kids. I watch tentacle hentai sometimes, does that mean I want to have 13 prehensile 5' cocks?

Also, re: snooping. Snooping is a breach of trust and if you're looking in my emails or my past IM conversations, you can; provided you're okay with being immediately banished from my life forever. Grow the fuck up and get your ass to a psychologist so you can drop the trust issues you obviously have.

@22: Mention of feminism at all causes anti-feminist comments. It's because, in a lot of places these days, being pro-equality is practically a requirement: you're a bigot if you're not for total equality between men and women (which is not to say we're there yet). When people call themselves a 'feminist', some other people see it as drawing a line in the sand, with them on the wrong side. You're calling them a bigot by differentiating yourself from them as being for equality.

I'm not saying it's ok: I get the difference between being all-for-equality-but-busy-with-other-causes and being actively-working-towards-equality. I'm just explaining what's going on.

I leave my computer turned on and my email logged in and open on the screen, so if my partner needed to use my computer they would easily see it. I don't really have much expectation of privacy that way. I think I've also told him my password.

If I cared about the privacy of my email from my partner, I would make sure everything stayed password protected with secret passwords, and then if they had to go to some effort to snoop and managed to break my password, then I'd be mad.

So I imagine the disagreements here have to do with people in each of those different situations. But to look at the extremes: I think that if you leave your email open all the time and get mad at someone you live with for reading it, that's silly, and if you think its no big deal to go to a lot of trouble to hack into someone's protected account, that's also silly.

Snooping is generally wrong - but if you think your SO is cheating - esp. is s/he denies it - and you snoop and find out s/he is? Completely justified. Of course, if s/he's not, then you're a spy and should feel guilty and paranoid. :)

Regarding snooping: my wife and I snoop on each other casually, because we're adults now. We both leave our PCs signed into our email accounts, and if we use one another's PCs we're going to see each others email. We borrow each others' phones. Getting married (or going steady, or whatever) involves a reduction of privacy between the people involved; just like being a child involves having less privacy from your parents than from some random stranger.

That's not to say we keep each other under surveillance though: that would be bad. We're just, you know, A COUPLE. If we have secrets we really want to keep, there are plenty of ways to do that. In summary: my wife reading my email = fine. My wife installing a key-logger on my PC and a hidden GPS tracker on my car = wrong. If you can't stand to give up a little privacy to your loved ones, you have issues to deal with. Ditto if you have to control everything and snoop invasively. There's a balance, and it's something most adults should be able to manage.

Maybe I'm not sure what feminism truly is, but being a strong woman in mind and body I have a feeling it's about doing what I want and being able to demand respect. So this guy might just be thinking that women have been wronged somehow, and in the past they were; however we live in 2010 where kinks and fetishes are all over the internet, and in many consenting homes. FRF, my recommendation is Sasha Grey. Or get in a wrestling fight with your gf and see if she likes the physical aggression. It doesn't have to be harmful, she can still be your equal. Maybe your girlfriend doesn't get turned on by aggression or submission, in which case you'll probably end up cheating on her with a consenting woman who likes your ideas.

SANA: Let's look again at what you wrote, and see if anything obvious jumps out.

Let's see, now...neither of us actually cares all that much if we come, but gosh, the sex is just, meh.

...honestly? You don't see the contradiction right there? You aren't particularly invested in getting an orgasm, but then wonder of wonders, when you didn't get an orgasm, it wasn't all that great?

It sounds like both of you are so working so hard at pleasing the other one -- and downplaying your own needs -- that you are actively interfering with your own ability to get pleasure from sex. Slow down, relax, and take what's coming to you. What's the best way to enjoy a piece of cake? While chopping wood?

Dan, you totally missed this one. May I?

SANA, if you want to get better at sex, you need to HAVE SEX WITH PEOPLE. Different kinds of people. Several, preferably.

The way we get better at relationships is to date lots of different people, learning along the way who we are--what we want in a partner, what characteristics are vital and which flaws we can or can't live with, how we want to feel in a relationship, what our goals are, and what kind of partner we want to be.

Same with sex! You need to learn what turns you on and gets you off; you need to learn how to work your own body. How can your partner know what you want if you don't know (or care) yourself? How can your partner BE what you want if you don't even know what that is? Sounds like neither of you is truly participating in the act. Why would that turn either of you on?

Get out there and have some sex, SANA.(Be safe!) Either open your relationship, or get out of it so that you can gain some more life experience outside of its sheltering confines. You need to learn how to truly participate in sex, both the giving and the getting.

Practice makes perfect.

WHAT! Snooping and farting are NOT comparable...

I can just see Dan's boyfriend reading this and screaming "YOU FUCKING READ MY EMAIL??!!"

What is "Feminism"? What is a "Feminist"? I'm a gay guy myself and all for the ladies, really truly, but I don't understand these words. They sound like so much baggage to me. It stops at equality, right? No?

@120 (and everyone else ragging on feminists) - The root of feminism is the belief that biological differences shouldn't dictate societal superiority. You don't have to be a radical to consider yourself a feminist. I'm a feminist, and reading that first letter was a huge eye-roller. As with all groups, there are lots of feminists out there who give the rest of us a bad name.

@119 - I lol'd.

Also, about the reading email/texts thing, the ONLY time I've ever scrolled through my boyfriend's email is when he left it open on my computer. I mean, there it was. But I'd never actually go log into it and snoop around. Unless you actually suspect your partner is hiding something, that just seems weird.

Neptune - makes perfect sense to me, I can't conceive of any other position besides "biological differences shouldn't dictate societal superiority" as morally or intellectually defensible.

But... is the word still necessary? Does it advance or hinder the cause it's intended to support?

To be clear *I* am not ragging on anybody, nor do I mean to troll here, but I freely admit that identification of self as "feminist" generally gives me pause.

I really dislike the word "snoop." It implies wrongdoing, which I think gives it a negative connotation worse than the way that some people already perceive the activity itself. I don't think broadening one's awareness of what one's COMMITTED partner's life entails outside of the relationship is snooping, whatever the vessel may be. Oftentimes, behavior that so many are referring to as "snooping" can result in something positive, like fostering greater patience when things at work are particularly stressful, or even simply knowing what to give his/her partner as a birthday gift.

@121: Part of the problem, I think, is that the same creed, "the belief that biological differences shouldn't dictate societal superiority", has become a requirement for the label "reasonable human being" in a lot of places. I think the definition should shift to focus on feminism as a movement for rights advocacy - this was the original definition anyway, but it's not the definition many of the comments here seem to use. See comment #9 for an example.

Feminism is a label which differentiates. If people continue to use it to mean "(passively) supports equality", other people will continue to see it as an increasingly elitist label, which it shouldn't be. Feminism is important in protecting the equality which has been gained, and culling the discrimination which remains.

I don't think you need to be a radical to call yourself a feminist, but I do think you need to be an activist. If it starts to simply mean "I'm not a bigot", it becomes divisive and elitist, and it hurts attitudes towards the important work that feminists do.

I'd just like to add that the advancement of technology has greatly affected the way that people can be dishonest, as well as the way that people can be caught. SCENARIO: My boyfriend goes to the bathroom and receives a text message; I look at the phone, see who it is, possibly read it, all nonchalantly-NOT suspiciously. I see nothing wrong with that and would have no problem walking out of the bathroom to my boyfriend with my cell in his hand asking "Who is Scott?" just to tell him that hes my friend's boyfriend asking me what he should get for her birthday. We must advance along with our technology.

@120: It doesn't stop at equality, because perfect equality will probably never exist. You can see it easily in the gay rights movement: gay couples could marry in LA. Was that the end of it?

The problem is, equality isn't necessarily a stable thing. Some part of the community will always be seeking to reduce the rights of a given minority, so you always need another part of the community working to protect them.

See my last comment about the definition problem.

Racing_Turtles, I see your point, and I know lots of people who are reluctant to identify with the word "feminist" even if they do agree with the ideology. So yes, it's possible that sometimes it does hinder, but I think that's largely due to the radical feminists who bring a negative connotation to the word.

But is it necessary? I kind of think so. In general, I think people who do identify as feminists do so not just they/we agree with that core belief, but because we've looked deeper into the cause. You know, patriarchy, blah blah, binary logic, blah blah, othering, etc. I happen to LOVE the subject, so I'm comfortable with calling myself a feminist. I'm also comfortable with being a happy, sane individual.

And while it might be possible to "replace" the word with something more progressive-ish, I think there's an important history behind it. It's just hard to imagine that working, you know? It seems like it would come of as corny rather than a step forward to hear someone describe him/herself as a "gender equalist" or something. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

@Rophuine What does it take to be considered an "activist?" Is voting enough? Standing up for your convictions in conversation? Are artists who use feminist-based themes in their work activists? Or do you need to be a protester/member of a feminist organization? I'm not disagreeing, I'm just wondering. The "definition problem" is far-reaching.

@Neptune: It sure is far-reaching. My position would be thus: If you go out of your way to raise awareness with a particular group, you can call yourself a feminist to that group. If all you do is provoke conversation amongst your close friends, but go on and on about being a feminist to everyone you run into, you're turning it into a divisive term.

If you're upset that you ARE an activist but I'm saying you're not allowed to tell (certain) people: are you being active about it because you care, or just so you can use the label? I'm not suggesting this because I want to take the term away from people; just so it can become less divisive.

Of course, I'm not actually a feminist myself, so I'm not allowed to say that I speak for even ONE feminist. I'd like other opinions, but only from people who've read at least #120,122,124,126,128.

No snooping, thanks. I have right to my privacy, the same way I want my government-parents-friends to treat me. Of course, I assume that it might happen, even more, that it IS happening (thank you, Mr. Bush.) However, in a relationship based on trust, if you snoop, it's your fault and you suffer. If you don't like whatever you learn by snooping, that's your problem, deal with it. Of course I'll pay the consequences too, but it's your fault.

Neptune: In just this thread, I've seen several people get defensive over how feminism is defined. Can you show me places in feminist bloglandia where one feminist confronts another with "hey, douchenozzle, this entitled and combative crap is exactly why we have a bad rep"? Or is it everyone else's fault fault when people judge feminism based on experiences with actual feminists?

Come to think of it, this is really the root of my issues with feminism. The culture has godawful amounts of toxic baggage built up. And yet for all the reasonable and moderate people I've known who've called themselves feminists, I've yet to see any effort from said reasonable moderates to clean out the attic, think up new tools and tactics, openly renounce the whackjobs, and basically make an active go at reengineering their own culture. That's a feminism I could really get behind. The current model, which tells me to shut up because I as a man can have no idea what I'm talking about, can't really complain when I'm less than thrilled to sign on.

@117 : Geez, I'd love to be involved with someone like you who would request to have all access to whatever I feel like writing to my mum and childhood buddies - "or else I can go out and fuck around".

@94 : I agree with you. Still, when my husband told me that was his mistress that he was emailing non-stop from our bedroom, I did take a screen picture of one of his emails, the one day he forgot to lock the screen when he went to masturbate in the toilets. Not to read it, though. Just in case he would tell me afterwards he never cheated on me. Which is what he's been claiming for the last 2 years... Yeah, like you want custody of the kids now ? Dream on.

@104 : I too would snoop on my children if I thought that they were in danger, or that they might be a danger to anybody else - absolutely. I'm responsible for them.

@3, 107 : yep, women will accept any "meh" sex, when they're pretty young, but if they're feminists, with those stupid "it's my body and not yours" ideas, later they will shun you if you're too bad in bed. And it's so much harder to become good in bed, than to yell at your ole broad that your urges overcome whatever inability you have to give her any kind of pleasure, yes ? And maybe hit her too, to make your point ? Hey, respect for one's "male card", you know.

The only rational explanation for FRF's position is that he's used the age-old ploy of espousing feminism to get laid. No shame in that - I've seen guys go macrobiotic, claim they're on a celibate spiritual journey - more or less anything. So now, all FRF has to do is get reprogrammed, admit he can't be a fantasy rapist because he already IS one - de facto - on account of gender, and recant his heresy; she'll be so happy and grateful, he'll get laid some more, everyone's happy.

maddy811: some people are at least pretty close to 100% honest without being manipulative hose-beasts. Like me--I tend to describe myself as "pathologically honest"... but, while I tend to demand *truthfulness* from my nearest and dearest (it really bugs me when people close to me lie), I do not demand that they tell all.

GoHuskers: a feminist man is a man who believes that women should be legally, economically, politically, and (at least more or less) socially equal to men. Or, as I've seen it on a t-shirt, "Feminism is the radical notion that women are people". So, a feminist man is pretty much like a feminist woman, only, you know, male. No ball drying required.

Rophuine: I think you can call yourself a feminist without really being an activist, provided--how shall I put this--you do so with a degree and vehemence commensurate with your level of activism. I consider myself a feminist. If you ask me if I'm a feminist, I'll say yes. If we're discussing feminism, or closely related issues, I might mention it. But it won't come up in casual conversation (except for casual conversations about feminism/gender issues)...

On the snooping issue, I think there's a balance, there is no One True Way to handle it. I'd be a bit upset if I found my (presently hypothetical) BF nosing around in my email (though mostly from messing-up-my-patterns rather than violation-of-privacy--like I said, pathologically honest), and I likely wouldn't nose around in his unless I had *strong* reason to suspect something hinky was up, but I don't see it as a Terrible Crime, either... but, definitely a YMMV subject.

And I have a somewhat odd suggestion for SANA. Actually, formally, take turns being The Selfish One. That may break you out of the "I'm being a horrible person by considering my own needs" rut without making either of you feel like you're being Horrible Selfish People. When it's your turn, concentrate entirely on what floats your boat. When it's his, concentrate entirely on what floats his boat. Since you know next time will be All About Him, you (hopefully) won't feel guilty about making this time all about *you*, and vice versa. Which should lead to much happier sexin's all 'round.

I don't call myself a feminist male, but I may have in the past. I was raised by a 1960's style feminist and I have nearly always had female supervisors at work. My girlfriend makes more money than I do and this is not a problem. Still, I have tied her up, spanked her, played rape and domination games with her. Hell I ripped her cloths off, tied her arms with her torn shirt and fucked her in the living room. All of this was consensual and extremely hot. Furthermore, most of it was her idea. You can still respect someone and treat that person like a pound of flesh to pound if it works for both of you.
FRF, Dude you are not sick. You are probably more healthy than your partner is, but that does not mean she needs to go for it. You two need to talk about how this sex game works on your psyche not on hers. If she doesn't want to play, that is OK. But it should be because she's not turned on by it, not because something is wrong with you. Insist on the conversation, not the fantasy.

Looking for Lesbifriends,

As a fellow single 22-year-old lesbian living in Chicago who doesn't look stereotypically queer and attends concerts and improv shows in hopes of spotting a cutie in a short haircut and plaid shirt, I say you should go with the tee idea. And maybe keep an eye out for a theater-going girl with a rainbow bracelet and beat-up pink Chucks. Because we're out here. And queer. And we should all have a dance party

@142

I'm not sure I really buy that. Arguably, one of the best things about a relationship is the ability to give up some measure of our autonomy. We're literally sharing our lives.

I understand the trust issue, but think of it this way: if I (someone with trust issues) am looking through my girlfriend's phone, it's in the hopes I won't find anything. I actually want it to be an affirmation that she can be trusted. I want evidence (being the empirical, analytical, person I am) that everything is on the up-and-up.

Yes, it's saying "I don't completely trust you", but I think some part of that is also "but I want to". I want to be able to trust you completely, and part of that is being able to say "I could do random checks of her computer/e-mail/phone/purse, but I don't need to". Trust but verify, yanno?

@134.

I have no earthly idea what you're talking about. I can believe in feminism as a concept (albeit within the restraints of "I want true equality, not just "make sure women have all the same benefits as men""), but what the hell do you mean he needs to be reprogrammed and admit he can't be a fantasy rapist because he already is one?

Rape fantasies, similar to age play fantasies, mind-control fantasies, or any other "if I did it for real it'd be illegal" fantasy isn't about actually doing it. Think of it a bit like martial arts: if I actually attacked someone, I'd be put in jail, and would have harmed someone. If I put on padded gloves, have rules, and spar, it's just good, clean, fun (and I can win medals). The fantasy is erotic, the reality isn't. Rape, as a fantasy, is fun. Rape, as a reality, is harmful, messy, and horrible.

But, I've also met plenty of very strong women, women who want respect, equality, and are devout feminists, who enjoy the idea of being forced, coerced, and abused. One of my girlfriends in college, despite being a self-avowed feminist, and being very strong/bitchy in her professional and academic life, enjoyed being humiliated and verbally abused. I think a lot of that has to do with a desire to perform the obscene, to go beyond what is acceptable.

@133

Out of curiosity, though, why do you care if I read what you write to your mother and friends? If it's something innocuous, you shouldn't mind at all. If it's something which isn't innocuous, the point is that you shouldn't be writing things you wouldn't want the person you love to see.

I do get that there are some things that are simply immensely personal. But that still doesn't seem healthy. I can't conceive of anything I could write to my parents, or friends, that I wouldn't want my girlfriend to see. I suppose if it were my best friend confiding in me, it would be different (since those aren't my secrets to tell), but the explanation of "I can't let you see this e-mail to my specific friend (who you know), because it's a personal issue of his" is different from "you don't get to see my e-mail".

I agree that women (and men) should refuse lousy sex partners, but that's (a) not the issue here, and (b) kind of a self-fulfilling prophesy. I don't know about you, but I've never been very good at high-stakes testing. I don't want to audition for my sexual encounters, and prove that I'm up to snuff.

The point of sex should be mutual gratification, not trying to prove oneself. And, not for nothing, but the whole "I don't want to have bad sex" thing actually makes people selfish (and thus bad) lovers themselves. I'm a giving person, but there's even a limit for me; most women I've been intimate with who demand nigh-on-perfection from a sex partner are the same ones who won't reciprocate. They're the ones who after getting half-an-hour of oral sex, give a couple quick licks, and demand that their jaws are tired.

And, finally, that kind of crap makes it almost impossible to become competent at it. I've benefited from girlfriends who were willing to actually tell me what I was going wrong and right. It's kind of like in a D/S relationship, you can't learn to be a good sub if you've never had a dom who was willing to actually teach.

@135

I find myself in absolute agreement with everything you said. And, not for nothing, but anyone who can quote TVtropes is just fantastic.

I will say,

A gay friend wore this shirt to a concert and it was subtle enough only to attract wanted attention.

"The Other Team" T-shirt:
http://www.zazzle.com/the_other_team_tsh…

*standing ovation*

Dan, you knocked it out of the park in this column.

YES to your response to SANA. Great sex is where both partners are being a little bit selfish and insisting on what they want. You feed off your partner's pleasure, and it ends up turning into this perpetual pleasure loop of awesomeness. What SANA was describing to us was sexual apathy.

And YES YES YES to JB. I've heard the theories about how snooping is always wrong, but I've just never thought it's that bad. Obviously, you don't want a paranoid, obsessive, abusive partner who checks up on your every move, and anyone who fits that description should be dumped immediately. But a little casual perusal of the emails once in awhile? Meh. I've done it, and as you say, Dan, I assume my husband's done it. I've never found anything out of the ordinary, and have never expected to.

Why do people hold their romantic partners to these impossible ideals? Who are these couples who've been together for 60 years, and neither partner has cheated or even fantasized about another person, neither has even masturbated, neither has snooped on the other, neither has lied to the other, neither has taken advantage of the other's money or time or good nature, ever, ever, for 60 years? Well, those couples don't exist, and anyone mean enough not to allow a little give and take in their relationship isn't in it for the long haul.

Oof, yah, the snooping thing - complete BS. The number of rationalizations on display are really impressive.

I've been snooped on, been in two serious LTRs where there was a constant need due to their own insecurities for my partners to constantly poke and prod for reassurance, and then ultimately to snoop. One was so bad about it, she'd clearly and obviously do it, then lie about it, AFTER I'd volunteered the information, no snooping involved! I'll tell you what it does: snooping lets your partner know you don't trust them and don't accept them at face value for who they are. They will eventually meet your expectations.

I have NEVER felt the need to invade my partner's privacy or go poking around. I TRUST that my partner tells me things and shares things with me. There is not much privacy in an LTR, as someone noted, but that is a function of each person choosing to be open and share.

I'm sorry: it's a direct reflection of trust and the sense of openness in the relationship. If you don't feel your SO is telling you what is going on or giving you enough information, you don't obtain it by snooping around on them - you come out and ask them. If you don't feel they are capable of being open with you that way, DTMFA. Plain and simple.

I like a lot of your advice Dan, but there is just no excuse for snooping, ever. This is now one of my immediate no-go red flags. The first hint of that kind of crap, I'm outta there.

@SANA: I feel your frustration, I'm trying to deal with this myself, right now. The sex just isn't really working, even though the rest of the relationship is phenomenal. I have just started down the 'getting selfish' path myself...we'll see. Good Luck!

"Sure, better to end a relationship than have one conversation that could clear up confusion."

Hahaha...and yet, you aren't talking about having a conversation; you're talking about avoiding a conversation and poking around.

@BADGIRL - you are 100% spot on. I get why he's fucking aroud; why are you opting for a 'taken' guy?

question:I'm a young, straight feminist male, and I've been dating my feminist girlfriend monogamously" ....

answer: you are a dickless fag. grow a pair you Bitch!!!

The whole idea about "if you snoop, you deserve whatever you get" is bullshit. If I catch you cheating by reading your emails, and kick your dishonest unfaithful ass to the curb over it, the fault is not mine for snooping. Neither is it my fault if I find out you were cheating and you respond by kicking my overly inquisitive ass to the curb for daring to snoop in your email.

That argument only holds if I find out something that I don't like but is otherwise inocuous. Say, for example, I read my wife's diary, and found an entry where she was grousing about how she hates my favorite TV program and she thinks I'm juvenile for liking it. I don't have any right to get bent out of shape and start taking it out on her, going on about how she doesn't respect me. It's not like she is sharing nastiness about me behind my back to our friends. That diary is private space for her to vent.

The fault would also be mine if I snooped and found you completely innocent, and then you found out about it and got mad.

But if you actually have something to hide, you have no moral high ground to stand on when you get found out.

"If you don't feel your SO is telling you what is going on or giving you enough information, you don't obtain it by snooping around on them - you come out and ask them. If you don't feel they are capable of being open with you that way, DTMFA. Plain and simple."

Translation: you dump them based on your gut feeling that they are lying to you, rather than investigating enough to figure out whether they are actually innocent, and you are just being a paranoid asshole. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

Look, if your spidey-sense goes off and you FIND something, then obviously it was real, and you dump them. To quote somebody: Plain and simple.

If your spidey-sense is going off constantly, and you never find anything, maybe you are the one with the problem, and you should get some therapy. Ok, or possibly they are just better at hiding their shit than you are at finding it, but you should at least consider the possibility that you are being paranoid. If you are constantly grilling them about it, that can't be good for the relationship either. If you just up and decide you can't trust their answers, maybe you are giving in to your own inability to trust, rather than their untrustworthiness.

If you snoop just for the fun of it, you are an asshole and they should dump you.

@147: I am married too, alas. My husband believes sex is a male-orgasm only sport. Yes, yes, I know I shouldn't have married him, but hindsight is 20/20, and if I could only relive my life :(. However, there are children involved now, so I must go elsewhere to get my sexual needs met. The situation is far from ideal, but I am making do the best I can.

There are two red herrings here that have nothing to do with the substance of the issues. They are feminism and snooping.

In the first case, a person shoots down a partner for discussing a relatively common and not really extreme CONSENSUAL role-playing fantasy, classifies him as sick and offers to help cure him of it. That's not GGG, it's not partnership; it's close-minded and adversarial. Feminism is not the issue.

In the other, a man found out that he was dating an actual PROSTITUTION WHORE. She concealed this from him, thereby robbing him of his personal and sexual sovereignty regarding what kind of relationship he wished to be involved in. How he found out is not the issue.

Tonight is Cheap Top Shelf Vodka Night™ in Bellingham, but that's not the issue either!

@151

"Translation: you dump them based on your gut feeling that they are lying to you, rather than investigating enough to figure out whether they are actually innocent, and you are just being a paranoid asshole. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense."

Um, yeah, in fact, it does make a lot of sense. I take it you've never been on the non-paranoid end of a relationship with a paranoid controller?

If you don't feel you can trust the person, don't trust them. If you think your spouse is lying, demand to see the proof, in a conversation with them. Staying with someone when you don't feel you can trust them is really not acceptable, for them or for you. You owe it to them and to yourself to find a way to negotiate a solution openly, or break up.

Snooping is the same thing as Sneaking around and Cheating: avoiding dealing with the issue - trying to do it covertly.

@BADGIRL

I understand...situation has been easier for me, no kiddies involved. Well, hope you are both enjoying!

You can't force a liar to tell you the truth by demanding it in a conversation. They're liars, their thing is not telling you anything. Sometimes the only way to know the truth about your own life is by snooping, when its info you have a right to know and they are keeping it from you. And you do have a right to know what you're being exposed to.

For once, I have to say I disagree with Dan's quick anylysis about the feminist man. Perhaps he will have to DTMFA, but first I think he should be encouraged to share some sex positive literature with her that may make her understand where he's coming from. He uses the word "young" to describe himself, so it stands to reason that she is, too. Many young women are very naive and fearful of sexuality, even if they think they have all of the answers. Some deeper exploration may help both of them gorw into their desires sooner than later.

Feminism: sigh. I've had a troubled relationship with the word, too. I'm better at extreme sports than most guys I know and in getting there have spent QUITE a bit of time thinking about gender roles (try being a teenage girl in a jump park; you'll see what I mean).

This is one of my favorite rants ever about the use of the word, idea, etc these days:

http://belledejour-uk.blogspot.com/ (read her March 11 post)

Pretty much the idea that thank GOD feminism got us where it did today, but these days many people who actually use with the word spend a little bit more time whining and ranting and a little less time actually using their strong femaleness to you know, do shit. It's funny, well written, and highly recommended for anyone.

I see SANA & guy as a pair of bottoms not realizing they are both search for a top?

@148

As with everything, there's an illogical extreme that it can be taken to. But, I think there's a difference between "I'm going to look through her things for evidence she's being unfaithful" and "I'm going to be completely paranoid".

Wanting to know what your significant other is doing is one thing. I don't think it's unreasonable to say (either verbally or non-verbally) "I want to see who you're e-mailing, and know who those people are", and not go insane about it. Your boyfriend takes paranoia to a whole new level, though.

There's a difference between wanting to verify your fidelity, and wanting to control you. It's possible to desire one without desiring the other.

@159

Speaking as a top, I'd not want either SANA or (if I swung that way) her boyfriend as a bottom. The worst bottoms I've ever had are the ones who don't actually know how to vocalize what they want (even if their top doesn't give it to them). The best bottoms I've ever had are the ones who know what they like, and while they enjoy being commanded/serving, aren't complete push-overs.

@160

Yeah, but the reverse is true. What if you are interested in your ex, and the "inappropriate message" is really part of a long-term correspondence leading up to you cheating?

Yes, it's possible to catch an innocent person in the trap of snooping. But what about the guilty person getting away with it because you "respect" her? My best friend was cheated on, because his girlfriend (whom he respected, and loved, and didn't snoop on) still had feelings for her ex.

So, yes, if you're completely faithful, and in no way guilty of anything, you shouldn't be snooped on. If you're guilty, and unfaithful, and a heinous bitch, you should be snooped on?

How do you tell the difference prior to snooping?

And, not for nothing, but I'd think any girlfriend who truly cares about her boyfriend would rather have him snoop on a cheater, than be cheated on without his knowledge. Would you really want any man (or woman) you care about to be cheated on and not find out?

A good relationship can recover from the "ex message" if that's really all it is. A good relationship can actually improve due to the girlfriend showing the boyfriend that he can trust her.

I'd rather my girlfriend know that I'm someone she can trust, than force her to accept that she just has to trust me. If I'm not doing anything wrong, I want her to see my facebook profile, my e-mail, my texts. And if an ex decides to send an inappropriate message, I can explain what's up to my girlfriend.

154: "I take it you've never been on the non-paranoid end of a relationship with a paranoid controller?"

So, now you are talking about what to do if your partner doesn't trust *you*. That's a completely different question than what to do if you don't trust your partner.

If you are the one getting snooped on constantly -- and you are innocent -- you have every right to get sick of the intrusions and break it off. But you would have the exact same reaction if your partner kept confronting you with suspicions that you had to successfully refute or else face breakup. Frankly, the first couple of conversations I would say, "Fine, look at my email. Will that satisfy you?" and the third or fourth time I would call it quits.

You can't demand that your partner provide proof that he isn't having an affair, or proof that he isn't lying. That's proving a negative, which isn't possible. Second, if you think they are lying, what makes you think they won't lie during that conversation? If you think it's maybe just a misunderstanding, maybe that conversation will clear everything up, but if you are far enough along to think that they are lying to you, you've gained NOTHING by talking to them about it.

If you are the one getting snooped on, and you actually get caught hiding something of genuine significance -- like the fact that you are a working prostitute -- you still don't have a leg to stand on. Privacy is not permission to conceal things of material importance. It doesn't matter how you got caught.

I'm not saying snooping is perfectly okay at any time. Just sometimes -- hopefully rarely -- it is warranted.

160: "Whereas if your boyfriend DIDN'T snoop, you can simply ignore the email, delete it, or tell the guy to fuck off, which you were going to do in the first place."

If this was the only thing that had occurred, your boyfriend wouldn't be feeling the need to snoop in the first place, unless he's a paranoid asshole. Chances are very good that you would have trashed that email without him ever knowing, exactly as you state. Unless he is checking regularly -- and he shouldn't be; I have never advocated that people should conduct routine digging expeditions without cause -- the likelihood that he conducts a random check during the precise window that this one email remains unhandled is slim to none.

Second, if that was the only message that turned up, that is precisely the sort of thing that can be explained in an amicable conversation, especially if you follow up by actually doing what you had promised and telling the ex to shove off, preferably cc'ing Current Boyfriend so that both of them know you are serious about being unavailable.

SANA: Sometimes the key to making it good is to figure out how to have an awesome time yourself. Your enthusiasm will rub off. :) If your boyfriend is a giver that means you can give through the act of taking!

Re: snooping. I disagree with Dan. You can't choose not to fart anymore than you can choose not to be a primate. Most people can't choose not to fantasize about other people any more than you can choose not to eat or breathe. But anybody can choose not to snoop. It's as simple as not doing it. Reading emails isn't the biggest deal, I will allow. But snooping in general is a bad sign. I know if my SO's ever read my diary, for example, or a private letter, it would be relationship over immediately.

@133: That's a pretty disjointed as all hell post, but what I think you're attempting to imply is that because I don't think a fetish makes you a bad person or that you need to be "cured" for having it, that means I'm bad in bed and abuse women? That's one hell of an ad hominem AND a non sequitur. I'd be impressed if it weren't so dumb.

You can have rape fantasies and not be a rapist. You can have a dom/sub fantasy without being abusive. You cannot have a fulfilling sex life if your partner thinks the things that get your gears turning is "sick" and "needs to b cured". If you think otherwise, you are objectively wrong.

RE: SANA... i think the LW is pretty young yet, and is just coasting along, sexually speaking. She just hasn't found the partner who will really turn her on, and she's oblivious to it because "you can't know what you don't know". If LW is going to stay with the current partner, she should try to be more selfish. While it sounds wrong to be selfish, in fact, getting what you want and/or need out of sex usually means that you are willing to take it to a higher level, and in order to do so, you have to put more effort into it.

As for not caring whether she or he orgasms, i think they are both either missing something HUGE, or they could just have low libidos. They might even be asexual, ie: the type of person who doesn't care whether they have sex or not. If this is the case, then they have struck gold and are a match, since neither one of them cares.

However, because the LW wrote in, enquiring about whether or not she is missing something, speaks volumes, and i daresay that she just hasn't had her bell rung yet.

My gut tells me that the LW needs and wants more, since she said that she has put forth ideas to her partner, which they have explored to her "minimal comfort"... why not maximal?? She also uses the word "meh" to describe sex, and it seems to me that the b/f might just be a lazy guy who just doesn't know how to fuck and doesn't care. I blame him since he has had previous partners, whereas the LW hasn't. It's not rocket science.

#23 is right - the LW needs to get out there and find someone who will satisfy her fully. Good luck!

@ 165 ...i feel the need to correct something you said there about Dom/sub relationships. Not all D/s relationships are abusive. I think you might be confusing D/s with S&M, and these are 2 completely different areas, though i'm sure some D/s relationships might incorporate some S&M into sex, just as some S&M relationships incorporate some D/s into theirs.

But please do not mix up and confuse others by making a blanket statement that D/s relationships include a level of abuse. This is misleading.

@ FRF - i feel for people who cannot voice their sexual desires to their partner for fear of being ridiculed and worse, told they are sick.

My ex wouldn't allow me to say the word "fuck" during sex (or at all) and as a result, i felt totally unaccepted and "shut up" while in bed because i was afraid to even open my mouth, for fear that something unacceptable to him would pop out. Of course, now i know that he was a puritanical prude, and that's why he couldn't understand why anyone would want to speak during sex. That's why he's the ex.

But FRF, your partner should have at the very least, tried to fulfill some of your fantasies with and for you, in a loving, supportive, and nonjudgmental way. Otherwise, how can either of you ever know what the hell is wrong when things DO go wrong, once there are many turn downs and turn offs from her, enough to cause you to start looking for someone who will support you and try to give you what you wish?

Regarding the (red herring) issue of feminism & fucking, I'm reminded of this stuff: http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs…
(and http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/20… )

Some "feminist males" basically defer to women to a ridiculous degree--it's silly, and really isn't even feminism.

I don't know if I count as a feminist male--I'm all about equality and deconstructing assumptions about gender, etc--I do that with everything though. My girlfriend is probably more feminist than me (little bit more vested interest from being female?), but she is less assertive, in general, and maybe even defers to me too often. Ideals don't have to take precedence in *everything*.

Any feminist leanings I/we have don't really enter into the sex though--it basically just helps me in knowing how not to be a dick and how not to follow idiot assumptions about genders/sex(es) (like "men always want it", for starters). And I'm confident that if I wanted to pursue any rough fantasies, they'd be treated as just that: fantasies.

(And my balls are plenty intact, thanks, but they really don't have much bearing on things apart from hormone/semen/sperm production. And how I sit down and how much room I like in the crotch of my pants, because anyone with testicles can tell you they're fidgety buggers.)

@Geequeer Don't feel to secure, simple keystroke logging will get around the protections you describe.

SANA: Read the Karma Sutra, or the Joy of Sex, etc. Your question was a bit tame for Dan, woulda been better off writing Dear Abby...

To snoop (from wiktionary)
1. To be devious and cunning so as not to be seen
2. To secretly spy on or investigate, especially into the private personal life of others.

By the definition of the word, openly reading through your partners emails, texts, and whatever, is not snooping. Finding incriminating evidence by accident while doing so is not snooping. Hiding the fact that you are reading your SO's emails, lying to him or her about it, is snooping. In my opinion, if you feel the need to go that far, there's probably already something seriously wrong with the relationship (though the fault may be yours for being too paranoid and insecure). Of course, exceptions do exist, maybe the SO is being all strange and secretive because he/she is planning some sort of special event or something.

On the other hand, I do see snooping as justified if you have a reasonable suspicion; this goes for both relationships, friends and your kids, really. The keyword here is reasonable, not suspicion. It's a bit like how the police must have search warrants to search your property, only you're both judge and executioner.

I'm still no fan of sharing sharing any sort of communication with a partner. Not because of what she could potentially learn about me, though. Rather, it's due to what she could potentially learn about those I correspond with, information that has been told to me in confidence. I know plenty of things about friends that they wouldn't want just anybody to know about, both of the purely embarrassing kind and of the kind that could cause problems or even get them into trouble if the right people knew. Some of this is, I'm sure, to be found in my email, chat logs or texts.

You can argue that any partner of mine has a right to know any information pertaining to me and my relationship with her. I am inclined to agree, assuming a serious long-term relationship. You can't argue that a partner of mine has any right to know private information about my friends or other correspondents; in fact, sometimes sharing such information would even be illegal (and, yeah, some of the information I know would go under that category, but I don't have that written down anywhere, and anyway it's probably so low-grade and so old by now I wouldn't face any sort of reprecussions).

To snoop (from wiktionary)
1. To be devious and cunning so as not to be seen
2. To secretly spy on or investigate, especially into the private personal life of others.

By the definition of the word, openly reading through your partners emails, texts, and whatever, is not snooping. Finding incriminating evidence by accident while doing so is not snooping. Hiding the fact that you are reading your SO's emails, lying to him or her about it, is snooping. In my opinion, if you feel the need to go that far, there's probably already something seriously wrong with the relationship (though the fault may be yours for being too paranoid and insecure). Of course, exceptions do exist, maybe the SO is being all strange and secretive because he/she is planning some sort of special event or something.

On the other hand, I do see snooping as justified if you have a reasonable suspicion; this goes for both relationships, friends and your kids, really. The keyword here is reasonable, not suspicion. It's a bit like how the police must have search warrants to search your property, only you're both judge and executioner.

I'm still no fan of sharing sharing any sort of communication with a partner. Not because of what she could potentially learn about me, though. Rather, it's due to what she could potentially learn about those I correspond with, information that has been told to me in confidence. I know plenty of things about friends that they wouldn't want just anybody to know about, both of the purely embarrassing kind and of the kind that could cause problems or even get them into trouble if the right people knew. Some of this is, I'm sure, to be found in my email, chat logs or texts.

You can argue that any partner of mine has a right to know any information pertaining to me and my relationship with her. I am inclined to agree, assuming a serious long-term relationship. You can't argue that a partner of mine has any right to know private information about my friends or other correspondents; in fact, sometimes sharing such information would even be illegal (and, yeah, some of the information I know would go under that category, but I don't have that written down anywhere, and anyway it's probably so low-grade and so old by now I wouldn't face any sort of reprecussions).

I got busted by a snooping girlfriend's MOTHER whoops! who read my non-password protected journal and reported on my crimes. Let's see: I sniffed the panties of a lovely tenant who seemed rather intent on leaving them around for me. I did not fuck said goddess when she propositioned me. No medals for that unfortunately. I got together with an old fling for whom I had no emotional attachment. She liked to be watched as she masturbated. I watched, fingered her, and jerked off onto her ass. All out of a mix of boredom and horniness during a time when my girl and I were long distance. Meant zero to me. I watched porn. I vented about the negatives in my life. I rarely indicated in my journal how deeply I loved my girlfriend (although I certainly told her so in person). When she dumped me it took awhile to figure out what had caused her abrupt and severe departure. She never did fess up. My opinion is that this snooping didn't accomplish much besides wrecking what was actually a wonderful relationship. I know I had never rummaged through my gf's computer or files when I had access to them, which was often. Yes, I take the steps to protect my privacy now -- but would I want to be with someone who felt it okay to snoop through my emails or journal? Doubtful. Would it be acceptable to bug the office of ones partner's therapist? And judge him/her for what one overheard during the course of therapy? There are some struggles that we fight on our own. It's a shit show and not for public consumption. I think one of the worst aspects of snooping is that it favors liars and sneaks. Those who cover their tracks don't get caught out.

@ 178... what i read into 165's comment is that it is *assumed* that abuse goes hand-in-hand with a D/s relationship. Just clarifying my own take on what 165 said. But i've been known to be wrong....... :)

@ 180... here we have it, what's at the bottom of this whole racket of male vs female. 180 says that he jerked off and fingered a woman "and it meant nothing" to him. He is a stud dude and will repeat this behaviour without a second thought to whomever he is dating at the time.

However, the woman he fingered and jerked onto is viewed by (a segment of) society as a slut-whore-airhead nothing who allowed a casual sexual encounter and therefore is untrustworthy and "dirty", beneath us.

Just sayin'..... society dictates "norms" and men have different standards to live by than women do, but my own opinion of it is that it makes no sense.

Bluejean Baby: I think 165 was implying that d/s relationships have the *appearance* of abuse (physical, emotional, or otherwise), but not the *substance* of it, just like someone acting out a rape fantasy has the appearance of rape, but not the substance of it. I suspect most d/s stuff would be considered abuse of some kind if the s partner was not a cheerful and willing participant.

Feminists are not the ones that gave feminism a bad name - it has been the right wing spin on it that has been swallowed by so many. The whole "politically correct" thing was started by reactionary conservatives that did not like non-white males asserting themselves. There is a wide spectrum of feminists; which includes both straight and gay men. In the end it is just a word.

Bluejean Baby, I usually find your comments insightful, but I think you missed the mark @182.
I would think that watching, fingering, and jerking off on would likely be considered by most as outside of a monogamous relationship boundaries. The slut-whore-airhead and society dictated 'norms' don't fit with my read of the information you refer to. I think the 'segment of society' you refer to would be pretty small in this case.
EastCoastDude may think his behaviour was OK, but you are casting the net a littele too wide with your comments IMO.

@3 oh you big hot hunk of steaming love-man action, please please please please give it to me harder, harder,harder

If feminists wanted specifically to not be identified with "radical feminists," it would be useful for them to come together and label the radical feminists as something other than "feminist."

My scholarly work is specifically in the region of Indo-European Linguistics, which possesses a pretty fantastic history of being used and misused to predicate notions of "Aryan" as being anything other than an old word for "Iranian" and justify the wholesale slaying of millions in the Second World War. That is, few enough in the European academic establishment possessed the will to stand against their less ethical colleagues, as it may have meant being ostracized, assaulted, or murdered themselves. So indeed "the desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise."

That said, this is a small issue. If I were to read the works of Jean-Paul Sartre and content myself to think him right in everything he says, I would be copying the summation of all the man's beliefs and postulations without possessing within myself the circumstances and experiences to justify them. So also is it a bad son that does not extend beyond the teachings and knowledge his own father imparted to him; it betrays an intellectual dishonesty and laziness to not build upon and refine the true bits and to reject utterly the wrong. But, fathers are not the only sort of people who can educate; you can learn quite a bit by reading Jean-Paul Sartre, in fact. So the same applies.

So does feminism not possess exclusively all the postulates and tenets of its value system; so someone professing an agreement with some of the core beliefs of feminism is not necessarily a feminist. It is a mistake, I think, to receive such a label, should you not have been a founder of feminism, or otherwise a happy slave free to say "this is enough" when reading its teachings--this laziness is comparable with the man who takes the King James Bible and holding it aloft saying "this is enough."

Books are very good things, but it is a bad thing to hold them in such utter esteem, much less just one or two--that is, using "books" as a symbol for whatever system of belief elucidated within.

180 is a prime example of why people snoop and why its justified.

Feminism is supposed to be about equal rights for both sexes. There is nothing wrong with a little consensual role playing about non-consent. I'm a woman, a feminist, and I wouldn't be offended by that suggestion. Then again, I think I'd be TERRIBLE at rape scene roleplay. It'd go something like this:

Him, grabbing my wrists and pinning me to the floor: I'm gonna fuck you so hard whether you like it or not!

Me: Yes! That sounds awesome! Oops, sorry. I mean, please don't!

Him: Um, let's just cuddle.

For SANA's letter, this kind of hits close to home. This is either written by my now ex-gf or someone who has a relationship way too similar to what mine was. But just for fun I'll pretend that this was about my relationship that ended a day before this was printed. For me, the reason that I was satisfied with our sex life, I don't remember saying "nothing" but whatever, was that as close to each other we lived, the sex was so scarce that I was content with what I was getting. Yes, all I wanted to do was satisfy my partner which got me off. I have lots of fantasies, a lot that I have dropped hints about. Dan has always said that if someone says that they might like something to their partner, chances are they are really into it. I guess I just wasn't as clear about it. And if this wasn't written by my ex, take some advice from me, he might be telling you what he wants, just not directly, so read between the lines.

Oh, god. I am so incredibly tired of sexist 'feminists' who try to label anyone who doesn't enjoy lily-white vanilla sex (including women) as evil, women-hating bastards. I hope Dan saved this one poor guy from falling into that trap.

@LOL: Hey, if I still lived in Chicago, and I ran into you wearing that shirt, I would totally hit on you. Just saying. Maybe I'll run into you at IO or Too Much Light someday?

@ 186 ...BTR, thank you for your compliments, i appreciate that :) I think i was up on my soap box there with my #182 comment. When a man says "it meant nothing to me", i see red. So, with the red now gone, i see that i really over reacted, and you're right, my net was cast way too wide. I apologize.

@ 186, thank you BTR, for your compliments, and i think i over reacted when i read what the guy said in post #180: "it meant zero to me". I agree that my net was cast way wide. I apologize.

LOL at this system, when it tells you that the webpage has expired and it seems as though your comment was lost, so you go and retype your comment, repost it, and ~voila~ there are BOTH of your comments. Oh well :)

I think I will go into business designing t-shirts to attract others. It could be 2 women stick figures holding hands or a little rainbow like an alligator on the chest, or two interlocking woman symbols, or I heart women (or girls) and on and on. I might even make a pretty good living at it.

Hey SANA, my situation was almost scary similar, she is 24 and we had been together for 4 years. The amount of miles between you makes it totally different, I can almost walk to her house faster than driving. But take Dan's advice, grow some chic balls and take some control. I'm not into dom/sub stuff but I loved it when she took some initiative and told me what to do or she did on her own, even though I could totally get her off on my own. Your last part about losing the man of your dreams, don't let it happen, regardless of sexual attraction, since we both came to love all the same things. Hopefully on my side she comes to realize this.

Thanks for showing some support, hope all goes well.

Regarding FRF and his gf, I'm very young, feminist with a feminist dude (thanks, to all you who are callin him a dickless fag, he certainly wants to be sometimes), and I understand her reaction. Here would be the reaction that would best fit everyone: his desires (which aren't, btw, a low-key groping fantasy in reality - theyre rape play, pretty hardcore) ARE sick. and hot. and so sick. and they make him feel sick and disgusting. theyre naughty and bad, and totally hot.

that's how i can live with it.