You can also get a Diva Cup from www.lunapads.com. Non-disposable, medical-grade silicon. Dump it out in the toilet, give it a wipe (in a public restroom) or a rinse/wash (at home), re-insert, good to go.

Or, don't mind me, #91 has it covered.

The letter-writer concerned about telling his friends about his kinks is also young enough that he's probably living with apartment-mates, and will be for a while. In that case, those might be people he might want to casually mention his kink to - there are some sounds (say, being hit with an object) that are difficult to disguise with music, and may lead someone living in the same space to assume something much worse (say, abuse).

So I feel like a "hey guys, its all consensual" head's up might only be the polite way to deal with it.

It's sad but telling that his idea of a life partner is a guy who is completely unavailable and totally committed to cheating on his own life partner and children, making him a duplicitous liar and scumbag. Little boy, I just hope you meet someone someday who treats you like a human being, because it could change your life.

Mr. Ven (93): I have worked a 10-hour day and not eaten or even had a chance to catch my breath yet, so I must be even more addled than usual, but I honestly have no idea whatsoever about what you wrote. Which caller/question/issue on the podcast do you refer to? What was Dan's take? Why would you be branded with scarlet S (and what does the S stand for?) help me with some context!

Or if you don't want to be bothered, I understand, and just want to say that if I suggested something offensive or disturbing, I apologize and plead extreme ignorance.

As for coming out as a kinkster, yes, of course you don't need to share the details of what you do in the bedroom with everyone you meet. But if you're involved in the scene, like I am in my home town, it makes me feel really sad and awkward when someone I'm close to asks me what I got up to last night, and I just say "Oh, I went to a gig/club/bar" when what I really did was go to a fetish event. It's lying, and I don't like lying to people I love.
Other situations that have given me reason to be more "out" about my kinkiness, just on a need to know basis, was when I've been asked about some bruises on my thighs, or so I don't feel like I have to hide my leather away so my house mates don't notice it. Again, you don't have to shock them with details, but I don't feel like I should have to lie about it, or hide it either.

And it might surprise you, but when you're aware of it, there's a lot of kink-phobic or denigrating language that gets used toward the fetish scene, labelling us freaks and weirdos. If I feel comfortable enough with the person, whom undoubtedly is only speaking so out of ignorance, I'm happy to leap to the defence of my interests.

Porn addiction, like sex addiction, is not a thing. It's an excuse for pussy-whipped beta-males to avoid censure at the hands of their hairy, overbearing, Jewish princess wives.

Menstrual periods were a liability to the tribe by attracting predatory animals. Women should be ashamed of their zombie status of bleeding for five days and not dying; I'm not, by far, the first to say this. If I have to feel some ambivalence about my awesome chronic flatulence, so do women about their disgusting feminine bleeding.

SUB, you've been given a lot of good advice, but I'd like to add a few things from my experience that I didn't notice from skimming the comments:
1. About "I cannot have a fulfilling sexual experience unless my desire to have a tilted power dynamic is understood and indulged". You'll find that few women will be satisfied by always dominating you, and you'll find that among those purely dominant women, very VERY few will be satisfied by always dominating you in precisely the way that you script it.

This makes sense if you think about it from their point of view. If a woman is THAT dominant, she's not going to be very turned on by being told she must dominate you every time, and in a certain way.

2. I strongly encourage you to get involved in your local kink scene, and not just play parties. Go to munches and talk with like-minded people because they can help you learn a ton about yourself.

One thing that I learned about myself, that I suspect I might see in you, is that within the group of men who identify as sub, there is actually a ton of variation on the theme. This makes sense if you think about it, because anybody who likes to be any one or combination of the following: tied up, hurt, humiliated, controlled, made to serve, etc., is going to identify as sub by default.

I identified as sub, until I learned more about myself. I'm a masochist, definitely, but if we're being honest with ourselves, I'm not very submissive. Obviously, I need pain, but I'm also turned on by the idea that a woman would want to capture me and make me do her bidding. But that's not very submissive. That's actually a bit egotistical.

At one point, I started dating a woman I originally thought was vanilla, but who turned out to be kinky and sub. So I figured, what the heck? I'm sub, so I should want to please her, so I'll top her because I should get satisfaction from pleasing her.

I tied her up. I made her talk dirty. And I tied her in an exposed, compromising position and went to work with a flogger. It was right about when I got to flogging her pussy that I realized, I am absolutely not enjoying this because I thrive on fulfilling her desires. I'm enjoying this because here is this beautiful woman who has given me complete control over her with the understanding that I was going to conduct myself in the exact opposite manner of a "perfect gentleman" and that was fucking awesome.

So I guess I'm a the contradictory "dominant masochist". Most people would call that a "switch". But my point here is that human sexuality is fluid, and labels are way too limiting. Try new things and don't get stuck in some label. Explore your feelings and desires with an open mind.

P.S. If anybody cares to know the end of that story, she and I eventually married, and are living our happily ever after, provided you are kinky enough to recognize that blood-curdling screams can be happy screams.

@110 Your statement has no basis in history or reality. There isn't that much blood, for one. Second, different cultures had or still have different ways of dealing with this. If you don't believe me, please google "The Golden Bough" by Sir James George Frazer and click on the fourth result (gutenberg) to see it for free. As far as I can remember, none of the examples he provided were about predatory animals, but about concepts like purity, luck, and jinxing. Still, I would probably have to become a cultural anthropologist to disprove you, so instead I ask; couldn't your manly hypothetical tribesmen kill the damn beasts for food? Could it be that menstrating is an untapped survival resource? I'll leave it up to the men to defend their honor against @109.

Diaphragm is the way to go for period sex -

1) it's not wasteful and disposable like the softcup,

2) you can have sex during your period unlike the keeper or diva cup,

3) it's fitted - so it doesn't leak like all of the above (your gynecologist will determine your size),

4) it wasn't invented by anyone trying to make a profit off of women - like big pharma and softcup. In fact, women actually were risking arrest for distributing it in the 20s,

5) it's covered by most health insurers (maybe co-pay required, but even uninsured it's only around $70 - compare to the cost of tampons or softcup over time)

6) the new silicone ones can be worn up to 24 hours - so at some point during that time you can make it to a private bathroom to rinse, or just take it out in the shower,

7) you're not exposing yourself to the bleach and drying fibers of tampons,

8) it's also a pretty effective non-hormonal form of birth control

Come out nothing, I wish kinky people would shut the hell up instead of trying to make everyone know how cool and kinky and progressive you are. Me, I am kind of kinky, and I do it in the bedroom with fun partners. I don't go around telling people that don't want to hear about it.

I couldn't get the softcup to work without leaking, and neither could about 8 or 10 other women I know. Plus, it's expensive and an ecological disaster because you throw it away after using.

Go with the Mooncup. It's brilliant, although you can't have PIV sex with it in.

I'm on birth control and choose not to skip my period, but the periods I do have are pretty light and free of cramps, so sex during that time isn't painful or too messy. Hearing some people go on about how gross they think period sex is can get annoying. They might have especially gross periods, but not everyone does.

Dan has always tried to make a rather strong distinction between 'sexual orientation' and 'sexual acts', mosty because his take on being gay vs. being straight is 'who can you fall in love with?' (not stereotypical ideas about anal sex), while 'sexual acts' (aka 'kinks') would be about 'how do you love the one you love'; that being gay or straight had to do with being attracted by certain kinds of bodies (male or female), whereas kink had to do with what you wanted to do to said bodies.

There are things that by such criteria Dan would have to call 'sexual orientation', but which are usually seen as 'fetishes' or 'kinks' (say, centaur or giantess fetishists; perhaps plushies, and even those attracted to overweight people). I think Dan would probably also not view them as 'sexual orientations,' because, in the end, I suspect his opinion is more about how desire interacts with the existence of males and females: I suspect Dan thinks sexual orientation is about whether you desire male or female bodies (or both, or neither), not so much about whether these bodies are semi-equine, oversized, overweight, or furry.

So basically, I think Dan's distinction is ultimately about being attracted to males or to females (or both, or neither). At which point (assuming I'm correct in my interpretation of his opinion) I begin to disagree with him.

I do agree that there is a difference between desire for a certain kind of person, and desire to do a certain kind of thing. But these things are so often intertwined -- you desire to do a certain thing with a certain kind of person -- that often (as in SUB's case) both can feel quite important to one's vision of who one actually is. BDSM is perhaps a strong example: more than in the case of, say, centaur fetishists, BDSMers see themselves as espousing a lifestyle, as something that is important to who they are (EricaP, for intance, takes her submission very seriously). And the desire for a lifestyle, for a kind of life, can feel just as deeply intimate as the desire for a kind of person.

So I end up moderating this distinction by an appeal to the kinkster him/herself: how important is your preferred activity / kind of partner to who you are, and how intertwined do you see them to be? For some people, these things will be very easy to separate, and they will find Dan's distinction very useful. For others, however, this distinction will be more difficult to make -- and those will be people who have "coming-out" problems like SUB.

Basically, if you think it's easy to keep your kink to yourself without feeling as if you're living a lie, you're probably a person for whom the preferred partner vs. preferred act distinction is easy and natural. The harder you feel it is to 'live a lie' and keep your kink to yourself, the blurrier this distinction will be -- the difference between a "dominant woman" and a "woman" will feel more and more like the difference between men and women does to a straight person (even if you're still straight enough to want a dominant woman, rather than a man -- 'blurrier' doesn't mean 'non-existant').

@22(MrVen), in principle, yes, you're right -- SUB's sexuality restricts the range of activities he can engage in (call that his 'GGG limit'), which makes him a less interesting and varied sexual partner than someone with a wider GGG limit.

But this is not his choice. We are who we are, we like what we like, and even though we can broaden our horizons somewhat, there's a limit to that as well. Besides, a more restricted GGG limit means having less chance of finding a compatible partner -- in SUB's case, the number of women who would be happy with him is severely limited --, which is more of a problem for the GGG-limited person than for the others.

Just as one might argue that bi people are 'better' than straights or gays on similar grounds (their range is larger), one might argue that people with a more varied GGG limit are 'better' or 'more interesting.' I, however, prefer to think that they are 'different' or 'in need of a specific strategy for finding compatible partners.'

Santorum worked out so well that I think we should call the mix of lube and menstrual blood Romney.

Mr Ank @118 - Why the straw man? Mr Savage himself said that SUB's kink made him a "more" interesting sex partner (allowing for an inference of generalization). It's sweet of you to rise to the defence of a fellow male submissive, but I was not attacking SUB at all or making any comment other than to make a mild protest, as I said, against pro-kink bias.

Had I been in a slightly more waspish mode, I might have considered that, on the kink scale, SUB's isn't all that interesting anyway. That could lead to some interesting contemplation on shifting goalposts.

No real disagreement on SUB. I'd go so far as to say that he's removed himself from the GGG framework, whether or not he had any choice in the matter (a point about which I don't care either way).

This is one of those rare occasions when I disagree with Dan. For me, being kinky is very much an orientation. I actually consider it more an orientation than my sexuality.

Until a few years ago, I considered myself mostly straight. Yes I was raised in a religious household and taught to believe that homosexuality was wrong. But that's not why I didn't fantasize about girls. I just didn't have much interest there.

I did know I was kinky from a very early age though. I knew I wanted to be tied up despite how long it took to accept it about myself and start going out in my local community.

Once I became part of that community, however, and opportunities of all sorts started opening up, my sexuality began to evolve as well. I found women I was attracted to as well as people of all genders.

Is it necessary to come out to friends and family about kink? I don't know. Most of my friends are also part of my local community now so I don't really have a problem telling new people what I'm into. My family knows nothing about it, as far as I know, and I debate often whether my kink should also be part of the coming out process.

Ms Cute - How many words beginning with S won't I say (hint: rhymes with glut)?

I was not too uncomfortable setting myself up here, if not as Loyal Opposition then as a renegade member of the same party, viewing my goals as generally compatible with those of Mr Savage Himself. This had been one of those points on which I'd gone along with an agree-to-disagree set of mind. But is this a point (given how forcefully it was made during the podcast) that is so much a core tenet of philosophy that agreement is basically one of the points of price of admission? At the moment, it appears so, but that could just be a shock-induced mood.

To SUB, It took me a while to learn, but I think it is pretty true, that when I was ready to tell the truth about who I am as a gay man, not everybody was ready to listen. The problem with truth is that while it is compelling for us to tell it, and we run that scenario through our heads a million times, the person who is hearing it is doing so for the first time. IF you feel the need to tell, do so with a clear awareness that for many it will be the kind of TMI that will make them so uncomfortable, they won't even know what to do about their discomfort, let alone their relationship with you. Also be aware that while it may prove to be cathartic for you, it is likely you will run into very few friends and family who simply don't care, or don't care to know. Good luck on a tough question.

@122: Okay, so now I only have to go back and listen to the podcast! (which I'll do before I forget your objection)

@109/110

You need to work a little harder on this troll thing, dude. You're not doing it right.

Mr V@120 -- I wasn't so much defending SUB (I didn't think you were attacking him) as pointing out that SUB's situation is worse for him than for any potential GGG partner. You may be very well correct in saying he's removed himself from the GGG framework (though, since GGG is more of a frame of mind than actually a specific range of activities -- see the GGG concept misused to pressure people into doing things they really don't want to); but again, this is more a problem for him than it is for others. But since you don't care about that, I guess it doesn't matter.

I suppose that, in an advice column to which kinky people write who often still face anti-kink biases, a 'pro-kink' bias sort of develops regardless of the advice giver's intentions. Call that an occupational hazard. But indeed, it would be a non-sequitur to conclude that people are 'better' because they're kinky.

"coming out" as kinky isn't like coming out as gay"

Quite right. Society finds it very admirable these days to come out as gay. Come out as a foot fetishist, for example, and you will be ostracized and ridiculed.

@123, very good point. 'Coming out' is a two-way mirror.

@124, the b) part of your comment reminds me of why it is that special communities, despite all their good sides, also have a bad side to them; namely, labeling, and name-calling, or, in this case, what a 'true sub' is. It's not that you can't define different categories or types -- there indeed are people who want specific things (to be spanked, to perform a rape fantasy, etc.), and there are people who want to submit to whatever the other partner wants. But these two groups are not hierarchical: they're simply different, one is not 'intrinsically better' than the other, and none is 'more legitimately sub' (taking sub as opposed to vanilla) than the other. They're simply different, and their 'ideal' partners should also belong to different groups.

Mr V@122, I listened again to the podcast, and I'm not sure about what exactly made you feel like strongly disagreeing with Dan. My guess is that it was Dan's advice to the 'underwear thief' -- was that it?

Anyway, I don't think there is any problem for those who are here if they disagree with Dan on specific topics or even on theoretical issues. I think every one of the most frequent posters here has disagreed with Dan at least once, and that wasn't a problem. 'Agreement' was never understood as part of the price of admission, as far as I can tell.

Dan, I'm a huge fan of your column, but your advice to SUB was terrible.

BDSM, much like engaging in sexual activity with members of your own gender, is in fact something that anyone can do for any number of reasons. But to dismiss the reality that BDSM, for some people, is a sexual orientation is roughly analogous to dismissing gayness as a sexual orientation because sometimes, primarily-heterosexual people will engage in gay sex. It's true that for some people, BDSM play and erotic power exchange are fun sexy extra thrills. But for other people (like me and maybe SUB), BDSM is actually a primary sexual orientation. If you're wired like me, your romantic and sexual entanglements MUST be coupled with a power-exchange dynamic for you to be happy in a relationship.

It's true that some people who like BDSM don't need it in a relationship. And it's true that some people who can't be sexually-satisfied in the long term without BDSM play don't feel an urge to consistently remain in a power exchange situation, so that (for example) a kinkster might be satisfied by getting tied up and spanked once a week by a mostly-vanilla spouse. But, like I said, it's a huge mistake to group everyone who does BDSM into one big pool -- some of us just can't feel the same intimacy in an egalitarian relationship that we do in a relationship that maintains an ongoing D/s dynamic. For me, D/s is not just a sex act; it defines my relationship in a much more fundamental way. Your wedding ring is about much more than blow jobs; my collar is about much more than ass-beatings.

SUB, you should trawl the personals (OK Cupid is pretty good for finding kinky people -- it's how I found the amazing man who now owns me. You don't need to be kinky in your profile, just answer a boatload of questions about sex so that you show up as being one kinky motherfucker, and make them important so that you make kinky matches) and you should get involved in the local BDSM scene (I'd advise against kink-specific personals sites; they are full of train wrecks and scammers for the most part. I would, however, sign up for Fetlife in order to find out about local BDSM groups and events. If you are nice and sane and not a total wreck in terms of fitness and hygiene, you'll probably find play partners pretty quick in the local scene; finding a kinky monogamous LTR in the local scene is much harder, though.)

But DON'T DATE VANILLA GIRLS unless and until you decide that BDSM is just an activity, not an orientation, for you. I hope it is just an activity for you; it is much easier to find partners that way. If you need to be in a 24/7 D/s relationship, even the most GGG vanilla people won't understand what you need and even if they did, they aren't wired to give it to you. If I had understood this when I was your age, it would have prevented a doomed marriage.

Also, if BDSM is just an activity for you, you needn't tell your friends. But if BDSM falls more into the orientation category for you, your closest friends will probably end up knowing about it. You can't hide an ongoing power exchange dynamic of that nature forever, at least not from people who know you intimately and spend a lot of time around you. My personal rules of thumb about this disclosure are to not delve into specifics with people I'm not actually negotiating sexual encounters with, to not reveal your relationship structure without something that naturally prompts it in conversation, and to keep that revelation brief and not laden with BDSM words. In this, D/s relationships have a lot in common with polyamorous relationships and other sexual minorities -- people who don't share our orientations just automatically assume it's all about sex. Kinky sex, group sex, kinky group sex with sexy sex sex sex... And, I mean, there's a lot of sex going on and it's awesome, but for me at least, this is how I *love*.

Sorry for the wall of text. Hope you see this, SUB.

To the people asking, "Why come out as bi if you're with an opposite-sex partner?"

For me? It was because I'm not all that good at hiding it when I'm checking a girl out or finding a certain actress extra attractive. I dislike having to keep my mouth shut when a straight guy friend remarks on how hot Karen Gillian is and I just want to heartily agree because hey, it's damn fun to have those things in common with your friends.

Even just the "checking out" thing...if people pick up on that, they may assume/talk amongst themselves/start rumors that you're a lesbian, throwing all sorts of doubt on your het relationship and bringing in a ton of drama. Not. Fun.

When I came out to my mom, she was half convinced I was really a lesbian, probably because she'd picked up on the attraction to other women and maybe assumed the interest in men was faked? It took some convincing on my part and a lot of explaining, but the bottom line is, she understands that my marriage isn't some kind of sham.

I had a few episodes in my early childhood where I was very aware of getting a nice funny feeling when I played choking games with myself. I even incorporated choking into my masturbation routine for quite sometime until I accept the fact that it was just too risky (I still put a cloth belt around my throat loosely every once and awhile just to feel something there).

Still the real kicker was when I kept reading and listening to Dan's comments about people training themselves to enjoy certain sensations (without realizing it) to the point where they can't orgasm without it, and the only cure being to re-train yourself off that habit. I took this to heart and am as diligent as I can be about varying the variety of ways I can get off, because imagining a conversation with a romantic interest about our sex life revolving around one thing is really off putting to me. It just seems like too large a price to ask of another person who would have their own desires and turn ons to have to forcefully fit them around a rather rigid set of guidelines and behavior.

Of course, my local community is MUCH smaller than most of the communities the people here belong to. And being as eccentric as I am my pool of potential partners was always pretty low. Still when someone suggests an act takes precedent over their choice of partner I just can't help feeling a little aggravated, especially since I would give up pretty standard acts and have even gone years without sex for a shot with a great person.

But if what @136 says is true then how do reconcile this power exchange with daily life in a society that handles partners as equals? (Purely for curiosity)

(BTW, I'm not suggesting anyone do what I did and re-train themselves. I'm just saying getting a partner who I could have a real relationship with has always taken priority over any sexual act. I understand BDSM is very personal and apologize if I offended anyone.)

the best medicine for cramps, headaches, nausea, hangovers and more is none other than nature's pain reliever: marijuana.

To those guys in the 80s (too far to scroll up) who are freaking out about the sea sponge option: stop it. I use sea sponges for sex during my period (on heavy days which are heavy thanks to the IUD I have to rinse it every hour, otherwise it can go a few hours easily). I rinse them in hottest tap water, and when the usage has finished, I rub some tea tree oil through them and rinse them again. They are SQUEAKY clean. The vagina does have natural self-cleaning properties and mine is absolutely fine, thank you very much.

@SUB The language you used works for a therapist's office, it's a good skill to have. But it is really unappealing in the bedroom. I may be jumping to conclusions but if you're planning on talking to a potential dom the way your letter reads, consider practicing a little dirty talk and figure out how to make it sound fun. Like, ask yourself, "would I want someone to whisper this in my ear?" Even if y'all are just laying out what your fantasies are, keep it short, sweet & fun. And most importantly, make it sound fun FOR HER. She may care about your journey to become who you are and your struggles with whatever but that won't convince her to take time out of her busy day and tie you up. So leave that stuff out of it.

Also, maybe you really can't get off without being submissive, sure. But please also consider that what seems impossible/improbable when you're single and celibate can change when you're in bed with someone so hot it turns you on just to see them turned, even if they aren't indulging your kink. I'm just saying, a sometimes-vanilla, sometimes-submissive compromise might actually work for you.

@126

No, but you are <3
(Responding to a troll right)

@139

Um. Pretty sure nature's pain reliever is opium, but marijuana is an acceptable substitution.

@116

That was almost poetically hypocritical. Nice work.

@108

Thanks for sharing but I kind of disagree with you (based on what you said so far)

"it makes me feel really sad and awkward when someone I'm close to asks me what I got up to last night, and I just say "Oh, I went to a gig/club/bar" when what I really did was go to a fetish event. It's lying, and I don't like lying to people I love."

When someone asks me "what were you up to last night" and the answer is "getting fucked" do you know what I say? "Oh not much". (Depending on the nature of the friendship, I guess it depends on how easily you call someone 'close' and how open they are with you about their sex life) I might be somewhat confused here so feel free to clarify.

"so I don't feel like I have to hide my leather away so my house mates don't notice it."

Um if my friends or roommate have leather gear (I don't know if they do) then I'm thankful they don't leave it lying around for the same reason that they're thankful I don't leave a pile of condoms or semen-stained clothing lying around.

Which is not to say that you should hide your kinkiness from your friends. I have some friends that are kinky and some that aren't (as far as I know) we know bits of eachother's predilictions because we sometimes talk about sex with eachother - but I'm old-fashioned and consider sex to be private (if there's an opposite of voyeuristic, I'm that). So yeah, if I come over, please put away your cat o' nine tails/dildo/gimp mask/cock ring/collar/etc. I don't think that's super oppressive.

Do you?

Finally: yes people, sex addiction absolutely is a thing.

@143

The context was the LW. I wouldn't do the softcup thing either, but they were suggesting it as a means to avoid dirtying hotel sheets. Then you came in with 'well I'm comfortable with my body, so...'

Maybe you weren't aware of the context you were responding to.

Finally, maybe the reason your post got negative responses is because you didn't consider the implications of how what you said might sound.

As in the sentiment (sentiment, not verbatum)

"I have sex on my period without preventing mess BECAUSE I'm comfortable with my body" heavily implies "if women don't like to have sex on their periods or use measures to prevent that mess it must be because THEY AREN'T comfortble with their bodies"

There's a chance that wasn't your intended message but communication is a two way street and if you communicate in an unclear or misleading way you don't just get to cal people out for reading it "wrong", or not reading it.

Coming out is a life changing experience. It empowers millions of people and creates excellent opportunities for dialogue and transformation. However, some people find it difficult to even define exactly what is it one needs to come out as. Dan's column is a testimony of that, whether it is a sexual orientation or a preference. In fact, Dan is currently working on his 'monogamish' book. Still, most of those monogamish couples will never 'come out' in the same sense that gay or bi people might want to do. And there are also all those us who don't yet have a label for it is we are supposed to attach.

I know that what I'm about to say will be received with blunt force by many of you, guys, but I believe that there is people who may change their preferences and some may even change of orientation. In fact, I think we all change overtime. Someone people may be bi while young and, later on, find it less exciting and stick to one or the other orientation. One may have a specific kink today and find a better one tomorrow and lose interest. I admit, though, that the great majority will remain stable once they come out of their own closet. I wonder what would be of me today had I came out of my very confusing closet a few years ago. I did it to some close friends but never as a political or familiar decision. Today I understand myself better and believe that it would have been a mistake very difficult to amend. However, I value greatly that ‘coming out’, even if it was to a few friends, because it gave me the opportunity to test myself and learn more who I really am.

@ Slidebone: sexual orientation refers to what gender(s) you are attracted to. Thats why Dan said "kinky" isn't an orientation.

HSL - Dan's right. With any cheater, you're not special, you're just next. He's been doing this for a long time and gets off on the secrecy.

I dont understand why the guy is so shy about liking to be dominated. When i first started talking about sex w a girl id just say that. its totally normal to me. i love to be dominated and i love to also dominate. its fun :)

Ewwww to the softcup. All a woman has to do when on her period is spray about 5 douche bottles full of water up her vagina in the shower right before sex, rinse it all out and voila! clean blood free pussy for a good 20 minutes. may still want a towel encase a little bit of water comes out.

Dan:
How did you miss Conversio VIrium, by way of Ivy League kink?

SUB:
If you happen to be at Columbia, check out http://conversiovirium.org/, the Columbia student BDSM organization.

Even if you're not, I'm here to testify that I'm an Ivy alumna (not Columbia) and was kinky when I was at my Ivy, so don't despair of finding someone compatible while at school.

And definitely join Fetlife.

SUB: a serious piece of advice. It's great that you're dealing with your health issues, and good for you; that's a hard road to walk, and the people who walk it well are heroes.

But be careful when it comes to your anxiety.

Some vanilla girls can be interested in topping a guy; some get into it and some don't particularly but will do it to be nice as long as they're getting what they need as well. But some don't. And not all girls are vanilla; some are subby themselves. Some girls can be turned and some can't.

This happened to me: I was with a guy who wanted to be topped, and who was also suffering from anxiety and depression. I'm pretty much all bottom as far as enjoying myself goes, so it went against my instincts, but I was prepared to do it sometimes to be nice. But he knew it wasn't my number-one fantasy, and that got bound up in his anxiety so he pressured and pressured and pressured me to say that I enjoyed it more than I did, to reassure him all the time - particularly after I'd just topped him, which meant every time I did I was dreading the crash afterwards - and generally speaking to affirm his subby desires to the point where he'd have a meltdown if I was honest about how I felt, however gently I put it. He'd freak out at me if I didn't volunteer to do it often enough because he thought it was a sign he was judging him. He kept insisting I wouldn't accept his 'true self' because I didn't get off on doing the things he wanted.

In other words, he turned our sex life into an playground for his mental illnesses. He thought he was just expressing his vulnerabilities, but the truth is, he bullied the fuck out of me.

Now I'm never topping another man again. Ever. I started out willing to give it a go; now I feel sick at the thought, because I got pester-raped into it.

Now, maybe this isn't you. But when you say things like, "I cannot have a fulfilling sexual experience unless my desire to have a tilted power dynamic is understood and indulged, and I don't think romantic love is possible for me without this part of me being accepted and appreciated." - that is, when you put it in such absolute black-and-white, have-to-affirm-me terms ... well, I've heard that kind of talk before. And it was from a man who made my life a misery.

If you meet a girl you like and she's not as into topping you as you want her to be, watch that anxiety and remember that you're not as small as you feel. Anxiety makes it very easy to start topping from the bottom, and you don't want to go that way unless you're seeing a professional. If you start with a vanilla girl and she doesn't turn into the domme of your dreams, you're going to have to accept that your choices are to break up with her as nicely as you can or live with the fact that she is what she is and not give her a hard time about it.

Or, tl;dr: just as you need a partner to accept you, you need to accept your partners and NOT beat on them for 'not accepting you' if your kinks don't perfectly align.

153-

Pester-rape! The word I've been looking for! In this very column, we've gotten into a discussion about how I've heard the word rape used to mean situations that I wouldn't consider rape but that others evidently do. You've provided a good term. Thanks.

@153/154

And in keeping with our earlier discussion, I found it to be kind of offensive. Oh well.

Why no to HSL? I know it must be obvious, but i am in a similiar situation now and very blind now, i can not see.

@HSL Why no? Must be obvious, but im in a similiar situation and so blind now, i cant see what is wrong. He loves him secretly, but is that wrong? Is HSL being lied upon?

@110: Spoken like a true Neanderthal!

@158

People got into it above if you want to have a look.

Basically...

worst case scenario, you get cut out because your fake girlfriend/boyfriend realizes that he/she is at risk of losing the truly important person in his/her life if you stick around.

the real best case scenario: you realize that you're in a relationship that can't progress and dump/him her. Then you can meet someone with whom you can have a real relationship with.

what you currently think is the best case scenario: by some magic he/she leaves his/her significant other to be with you (yay!)

you spend what feels like ages trying to build trust despite the old maxim "if he'll cheat with you he'll cheat on you" and despite lingering doubts you finally reach a place where you feel you can trust him/her. After all, it's different with you, you put in the effort that his/her ex didn't, you truly understand him/her.

Then they cheat on you.

@142 -- What's hypocritical? If a woman insists that she has an especially gross period, who am I to tell her she's wrong? At the same time, many women aren't so grossed out by their periods, and not all period sex is gross.

But I'll take your compliment that I sounded poetic. Have a fun weekend!

155- mydriasis--

I find it to be kind of offensive too, but isn't having a term like "pester-rape" better than having someone just use "rape" and letting the listener come to a vastly different image of what transpired than what the speaker meant? "Pester-rape" is, at least, getting closer to denotative precision, though the argument over connotation and therefore appropriate level of outrage, sympathy, and legal implication will continue.

@ 155, 163 -

I think you guys have touched upon a linguistic gap here. I agree "pester-rape" is closer to the precise definition of the concept, but the word "rape" still has extreme connotations for some.

We need a word to describe that "gray area" scenario where force isn't used, but the person still feels their consent was coerced at some level. I've been in that situation a few times, and while I'd never call it rape, I still felt ashamed and uncomfortable afterward because the person had worn me down with emotionally manipulative pestering.

Ideas

164- Spiral-- How about "a situation where I felt ashamed and uncomfortable because I felt worn down with emotionally manipulative pestering"? I think that's a great term and makes the distinction with rape quite well.

@165: I am all for precision in language, and I think your suggestion that we use the more complete description is great. I wish people would adopt it or something akin to it. However, I understand that most people want a quick, catchy, one-word term. I realize this, but wish they wouldn't use the word rape to refer to "a situation where I felt ashamed and uncomfortable because I felt worn down with emotionally manipulative pestering."

@164/5/6

"We need a word to describe that "gray area" scenario where force isn't used, but the person still feels their consent was coerced at some level"

How about "coerced"?
Jesus.

163-167--
For some of these, "convince" is more like it.

How about pester-fuck, like a pity-fuck meets a cluster-fuck...

For me, personally, the softcup did not work at all and was a terrible option. It leaked, popped out constantly, was extremely uncomfortable. Yes, I tucked it behind my pubic bone like the instructions say. I just have a terribly tiny vagina that squeezes things out--I get the same problem (to a lesser degree) with tampons.

@170

This. Also: specula.

@167(mydriasis et al.),

why not simply 'manipulate'? It can cover a wide gray area from indirect convincing/manipulation to actual veiled (or not so veiled) threats.

And doesn't it also express the basic idea that makes some people want to see that as rape, namely, that the actual wishes and desires and objections of the person being manipulated are being ignored or belittled?

Re: Defining the word rape or coming up with an alternative. Or maybe: redefining the word rape.

The problem is exactly in the grey area. The word rape suggests that nothing could be done to say no to the attack. That might include returning violence and getting bloodied or submitting because a gun was held to one's head.

Coercion, manipulation, or pester all suggest that a great deal could be done, like, say, walk away from the manipulation. Don't give in when he says he won't love you anymore or needs the reassurance. Tell him you don't feel like it and want to sleep or whatever. If he's willing to pester you a few hundred times until you give in, try saying no a few hundred times until he does.

Calling any of those things a variation of rape just feeds the Republican agenda. I'm in favor of women making their own decisions about abortion, but look at it from the Republican point of view for a second. If they say that abortion is O.K. in instances when a woman is raped, they do so when they get an image of a woman walking down a street, having a rope tied around her throat, and raped while she can't scream for help. The next thing they know, they have women saying they need abortions because they were "raped" when they mean their long term boyfriends bothered her so much that she gave in. I hope I never say anything in agreement with an anti-abortion whacko, but I have to admit they uncover a logical fallacy there. Women aren't doing themselves a favor when they bend definitions to the point where they become meaningless.

@Crin

I have to admit, your decision to go with "but what would Republicans do with this" was pretty amusing to me. Why go in that direction? My understanding of American politics is that Republicans are batshit insane whether you give them something resembling ammo or not.

To me the obvious 'this is why you shouldn't do this' group isn't repubs, it's rape victims. Like you said "Women aren't doing themselves a favor when they bend definitions to the point where they become meaningless.". Rape is a word used to describe one of the worst things that can happen to a person. When people use it to refer to every little bad thing that happens to them, it becomes kind of upsetting to people who ACTUALLY were raped.

Coerced, manipulated, pressured - all words that much more accurately describe the situation. There's no need to use the word rape.

Finally... did Hunter just drunkenly come on to the entirety of the SL comments section? The fuck was that?

As per pester-rape, how about "pester-forced", or "pushed"?

Having gone through the half insane part of the end of a relationship, and desperately fighting the hysteria that can lead to "pester-fucking", being in that kind of situation is horrible for everybody.

Peace.

@110: We can do with less of your type, so please refrain from mating with us "disgusting" women. Your speculation is unfounded and absurd-over the course of a period, the amount of blood amounts to a few tablespoons over the course of a week.

Also, my OBGYN told me that it's good to have a period every few months to shed the uterine lining and to flush out the uterus. Periods also eliminate excess iron. Suppressing periods with birth control is still new and therefore experimental. I see little harm in having one every few months, but I can't see how anyone can say it's 100% safe and wise to skip for long periods of time.

175-- Mydriasis--

I absolutely agree with you. As far as I can tell, women use the word rape instead of coerced, manipulated, pestered or pressured because they're trying to insinuate that they had no control over the situation when anyone listening to the tale would conclude that they had plenty.

In at least one case, back in the late 70s, there was even a therapist who thought it important to convince her client that she really was raped. That was supposed to make her feel better or something.

@Crin

Wow, that is nutty.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it's not nice being coerced into sleeping with someone. It's not nice feeling pressured, no doubt. But it's certainly not the same as struggling with someone much bigger and stronger than you who's trying to take your clothes off, trying to stop them and knowing that it's a matter of whether or not they choose to let you stop them. To be honest I find it kind of abhorrent to co-opt the experience of rape to try to get extra sympathy. I figure people who do this don't really mean it that way, and don't realize the implications of using such a word.

But it does upset me and I wish people wouldn't do it.

"I believe in being accommodating and understanding of my sex partner’s needs"

unless they conflict with yours, clearly

Ms Cute/Mr Ank - What concerned me was that I might be trolling without knowing it. Mr Savage was so emphatic that ALL MEN ARE S***S and IT'S JUST A FACT that it seemed to be a Basic Tenet of Philosophy that all non-trolling posters are assumed to be willing at least to vote for, if not endorse or co-sign. (Mr Blues springs to mind.)

Fortunately, or not depending on viewpoint, the anti-Ms Grace rant has left reasonable doubt that he views this as a presumption point.

It's exciting to see therapists recommending Dan Savage to their patients. The times are changing and sex positivity is winning!

@184 "Flushing out excess iron is a good idea however (which is why I donate blood!)"

Um that is nonsense - we have moved past the eighteenth century and bloodletting for general wellness. But thanks for giving blood!

@184

I don't know if evidence suggests that prehistoric women had NO periods (does it?). I'm certainly aware that we would have had less for the reasons you said but it's possible there would be some gaps in there.

In prehistoric times I would have been dead long before I reached the age I'm at now (early 20s). I definitely would have died in childbirth (I'm a little thing, which is why giving blood isn't an option either)

Plus, you clearly have enough understanding of the biology to realize that being on the pill is NOT the same as being pregnant and nursing all the time.

If your premise is that recreating prehistoric conditions on the body is by definition "safe" then it absolutely doesn't directly follow that stopping periods is safe as well.

Don't get me wrong, if women want to take the pill continuously, that's fine. So far (to my knowledge) medical evidence indicates it appears to be harmless. I have a couple periods a year and I would never go back to once a month unless I was dragged kicking and screaming.

It's just that that's a pretty spurious equivilancy you just proposed there.

@185

Google hereditary hemochromatosis.

Malcolm Gladwell has an interesting article on the subject called "John Rock's Error." Take a look. It will clear up the questions about how many periods pre-historic women had and how difficult it is to say what's meant by "natural" in regards to periods, birth control pills, and pregnancy prevention. Besides, it's a good read.

Hunter,

I have quantitative proof that I don't.
Also, isn't it high time you find someone else to obsess over?

@184 Asterix,

Nursing is NOT a guarantee against pregnancy, so it stands to reason that it shouldn't stop periods either.

Even in historical times, if a woman is starving or under extreme physiological stress, their menstrual cycle can be disrupted. The superabundance of food and other environmental factors (female hormone mimic pollution amongst others) are driving the onset age of menstruation down; a healthy 13 year old is physically developed like a 16 year old of even only a couple of centuries (century? Look at standard clothing sizing for children derived at that time) ago.

Mydriasis, I'm not a little thing, nor was my birth size/weight low, but without antibiotics my dad mightn't have survived WWII. Without sheer luck he might not have walked into the side of a hut in a whiteout on Mt. Washington either. Either way, I might not be here now but for circumstance, but I am anyway. I have more than a few stories of imminent lethality to share from my father and myself with my children, but this is how things turned out and for that I am grateful.

Peace.

Soft cup may work for period sex, but if you are looking for a greener option ladies then check out THE KEEPER (USA), THE DIVA CUP (CANADA), MOON CUP (UK). enough with the waste!!

His Secret Love.

So my dad just recently confided to me that his home life with my stepmother isn't working out and that they've both been bad to eachother...and blahblahblah. The next day I happened to read this post which coincidentally, resembles my fathers life. His age, three children, married to his high school sweetheart...

This is likely a coincidence, but it not just know that:

1.) you are the age of his children (two of them).
2.) you would never every be anything other than a secret.

Just to say, I've given the Instead Softcup many chances, and I can sum up the experience in one word, plural: INFECTIONS.