I consider myself pretty open, sexually. I just can't get behind sex work. My Christian upbringing may have a lot to do with this. I don't see watching porn as cheating, but interactive, like a webcam girl who talks back, that IS cheating, at least in my book. I don't care if it is a stranger, doesn't make one bit of difference.

@103: lots of people who don't watch porn exist. Almost all of them are women.

@Erica

Most definitely, but the whole "HAHA NOT WATCHING PORN, HOW RIDICULOUS" thing gets old.

@mydriasis

I think the reason it's considered unreasonable to want a partner that doesn't watch porn is less about whether or not those people exist and more about your likelihood of finding one. Particularly if you're interested in men. Of course there are men who don't watch porn. They are a minority, and as such difficult to find.

It's like anything else. A person is welcome to want what they want in a partner, they just have to accept that the more things they want (especially if the things they want are not typical)the longer it will take to find a partner.

Personally, I'm a bit picky, though not in specific qualities as much as I just don't "vibe" with a lot of people. I also don't bitch about how rarely I'm in a relationship, because I recognize it as partially "my fault".

Mydriasis, It's not "Not Watching Porn, How Ridiculous".

It's, "If You Are With Me You Can't Watch Porn" part that is ridiculous.

None of this discussion has to do with what any individual wants to do themselves. It is about what they demand from their relationship partners.

You may not watch it, and certainly there are others who don't watch it. And that's fine.

But the vast majority of men do watch it. Vast, Vast majority of men. Getting all upset that they do is insecurity, and trying to tell them they can't is controlling to say the least.

Nocutename @60 gets the prize for the most literary references and trivia included in a post today.

And I concur: Between Disney princesses settling down with Prince Charming, romance novels with their "one true love" meme, and churches that teach that monogamy is God-given and therefore will be easy; a lot of women (and some men) have totally unrealistic expectations about finding "the one". The one (straight man) who doesn't watch any porn, puts the toilet seat down, loves Meryl Streep movies, doesn't get at all whiney about wanting sex, but rises to the occasion she's aroused. The one (straight woman) who is always perfectly made up, never grumpy, buys you just the right power tool for Valentine's Day, and is always ready to jump your bones, except when you really rather she fetch you a cold beer. "The one" exists. But as the name implies, there's only one of them. One of each. They've hooked up with each other and are deliriously happy, satisfied and have no interest in dating anyone else. So the rest of us will have to settle for somewhat less, squint a little, focus on their strengths more than their faults and "round them up to one".

@DAVIDinKENAI: Thank you (takes little bow).'
Okay, I can compromise on the porn, the Meryl Streep-watching, but the toilet seat: that's a deal breaker!

Mr Fortunate - Sorry, I should have reference Dr Schlessinger (doesn't one just love those workplaces that play conservative talk radio all day) and one of her few useful questions, as to whether the particular stand a caller was taking was really The Hill on Which (S)He Wished to Die.

In other words, you often make highly coherent and reasonable posts. This is the most detailed, lengthy and passionate I have ever seen you being on any subject. Do you really want to die on the hill of defending straight men whose women don't want them looking at pornography, especially when there are so many breeders capable of defending themselves who would never return the favour for us, and there are so many issues much closer to home where your coherence, intelligence and passion are desperately needed?

Of course, you have every right to make this your big issue if you genuinely feel so moved, but please consider it a compliment that I thought you worth the comment. Nine people out of ten or more I'd just let defend straight men until they passed out from the effort and barely notice.

@Nocutename: And I can accept PMS and actually prefer no make up, but I have to stick to the power-tools rule. It could, however, be a Home Depot gift certificate - a reasonable compromise, I think.

Besides, what is a Hitachi Magic Wand itself, but a power tool?

Ah, thanks for the clarification. Now I understand what you meant.

Well, I have no intention of dying on this hill. And I have made other, more detailed and lengthy posts in the past. The detail and length of my posts tends to have more to do with how much free time I have at the given moment than anything else.

That said, I have no reservations about defending straight men in this regard. I recognize that many straight men have stood up for me (directly or indirectly) in many instances. Hell, some of my best friends are straight guys ;^)

But thank you for the compliment. It is appreciated.

@DavidinKENAI: I love to wear makeup--I wear it because I want to. The Hitachi Magic Wand is not every woman's go-to vibrator (it doesn't do it for me). But I appreciate the gestures. And a gift certificate from Home Depot is surely an easy enough gift. I don't know that most people who want to get power tools as presents would really want a non-power-tool-loving person choosing the tool for them, anyway.

@Fortunate: I look forward to your detailed, lengthy posts, which are generally so nicely logically laid out.

@Mr. Ven: "Breeder?" Really? Most of us on this thread are your allies; I wouldn't dream of calling you a faggot or a homo. Why the insult? I realize that you are probably thinking of other straight people, perhaps those not on the Savage Love site, but we are the ones reading your comments. Additionally, must we all just fight our own battles? Can we never help anyone else out? There isn't a single civil rights issue that was won by the participation of the rights-deprived group alone. And, yes, members of a minority group can stand up when members of the majority are being wronged. I know you are a separatist, but I didn't think it extended so far.

As for the term "breeder," it's fucking offensive. Not all straight people reproduce; not all are even fertile (so I imagine a straight person who wants children but is struggling with infertility might find being called a breeder at best, ironic, and at worst, deeply painful). Gay people can reproduce--they can "breed," in the careful, deliberate way that breeders of purebred animals breed those animals. Well, that's pretty offensive, isn't it? Likening gay parents to animal breeders. So why is it any less offensive to equate all straight people--parents and childless ones--to dog breeders.
Lastly, if it weren't for the breeders, no one--gay or straight--would be here.

It seems to me that if someone in a close relationship says, 'I won't do X', and then does X, regardless of what X is, it's cheating. It has nothing to do with the intrinsic goodness, badness, universality or inevitability of X.

@115: It's not cheating; it's lying.

@114's third paragraph: An argument I (a straight ally) make to non-aligned straights that seems to get some traction is, "Why am I doing this (starting a PFLAG chapter, advocating before the School Board, passing non-discriminatory language at the electric utility, etc)? I'm doing this because during the last big Civil Rights struggle for more racial equality in the 1960's, I was in diapers and therefore excused. I don't feel like I can be excused from this round, even though it doesn't directly benefit me or, as far as I know, my children."

"Daddy, what did you do during the War?" is question I want to be able to answer proudly. Shooting Wars? As an un-registered-for-the-draft CO. Wars on poverty, racism or discrimination? On the side of justice, I hope.

I'm straight, white, property-owning, male, and part of the upper 2% - people like me have always been "in the tent". I feel better about tent, society, and myself when the tent is bigger.

vennominon: People with dicks who like dick? That's cool. People with dicks who like dick and ARE dicks? It doesn't help your cause. Sorry, it's not fair that you have to ask the majority for your rights, but you do. So you and I both need to work for that day because 5% of the population can't do it on their own.

@116: I would say 'cheating' because not-doing-X appears to be part of a deal (in this case). It's a promise about future behavior.

Ms Cute - I thought the use of the B word, especially as there were several other instances in which it was NOT used where it could have been, was a sufficiently clear marker indicating a particular SUBSET of straight people with a nasty turn of mind (Classic example - Ms Gallagher or Mr Brown) that regards openness to natural, unplanned procreation (and there is a tie-in to the most recent anti-equality argument) as the one shining quality that entitles the holder to all the goodies making the rounds.

However, in honour of Mrs Collins, I shall refrain even from considering the question of whether you might be straightsplaining. And I thank you for the opportunity to: a) both be rather more reasonable than Mr Ank by explaining my usage and then dropping the word in question rather than defending it through three or seventeen posts, and b) commemorate an anniversary by yielding readily - easily - to the persuasion of a friend, even if, as someone once said, to yield without conviction is no compliment to the understanding of either.

Mr Kenai - I have no inclination to quarrel with you. But I shall not merely agree with everything and thereby imply that you were undeserving of the compliment of rational opposition.

There is a bit of a difference here. If gay people were being attacked in a thread (sorry if anyone thinks that porn-viewing opposite-sexer men aren't being attacked; please accept chastised then as a substitute) and the most eloquent and vociferous defender were straight, eventually there would be a feeling of appropriation about it, or perhaps a sense of a perception that we could not properly defend ourselves.

Here, Mr Fortunate has gone well above and beyond the call of duty of any ally in defence of opposite-sexer men (and I am sorely tempted to start a bi-related sideline, but I won't) who watch porn. My reaction to that had parts. One, there were more than enough of you to defend yourselves perfectly adequately; you yourself were performing admirably in that respect. As you note yourself, we are not so fortunate on home topics. But the main cause of my rue was that Mr F was fitting far too well into the Useful Sidekick role, not only taking but apparently reveling in secondary status. That always gets us taken for granted - as Miss Mitford would say - every, every time.

Oh, bother! I put my a) in the wrong place.

(Worthy of a Caption Contest, I suspect.)

Mr Fortunate - I entirely agree that there are many times when one should stand up for straight men, women, or anybody else besides ourselves. And I am relieved that you won't be dying on this particular hill. It was just starting to feel like hearing someone Jewish outpontificating Mr O'Reilly concerning the War on Christmas.

@ 101. Thanks! The "If you love me..." meme sounds sweet, but it is just the edge of the blade. Slice in a bit deeper, and it becomes emotional blackmail of the most insidious, passive-aggressive kind.

But that's not what I'm here for. Since there's a porn theme going on today, I'm asking for references. I'm looking for online porn of a genre that's apparently so kinky, so transgressive that it's almost impossible to find.

Strong stomach? If so read on:

Two straight people.

Explicit, penetrative sex. Oral okay too.

Credible, affecting orgasms for both. (Yes, even the guy!)

Believable people (not porn stereotype people).

No money shots! Very demanding about this one.

Call it a wild and crazy dream, but I envision the male and female orgasms taking place /during/ the penetrative sex part.

...and here's the really tough part:

A vibe of caring, and of the two people enjoying this rather than all of the quite different vibes that porn works up so hard. (Men in particular seem to be forbidden to express any emotion at all.)

There's my kink. No electricity, no costumes, no geese, no Mazola, or Bulgarian tumblers.

Thanks for your patience! I hope others will also benefit from these suggestions.

@123:
Try x-tube. Between all the other stuff, you sometimes get one exactly as you described.

https://makelovenotporn.tv/ ?

But the vast majority of men do watch it. Vast, Vast majority of men.

*shrug* It could be true, but I don't get how anyone knows this. I can't think of more than a couple of people IRL whose porn habits I know anything about.

Thank you, Mr. Ven.

"batshit crazy" is sure getting thrown around a lot in these comments - i'm kind of disappointed with you guys. can't we discuss how to deal with the underlying issue instead of calling a (probably very young) woman crazy? that will probably just make her more insecure and defensive - certainly not introspective or secure, the emotions i personally deem necessary to get her through this.

@123: Dude, I shudder to imagine what horrible things must have happened to you in order for you to develop such a perverted kink!

Seriously, though, the genre you're looking for is "homemade video" and there's quite a bit of material out there. If you are willing to pay, you can find it on AEBN.

Unfortunately, it seems there is a lack of supply of genuine homemade videos to meet the demand, so much of the porn in that category isn't the real deal. Some of it is, though, especially earlier releases.

"Most men lie about it and women should get over it" is the prevailing attitude I see here, which is pretty fucked up. I agree that looking at porn isn't in the same ballpark as cheating; hell, it's not even the same game. My boyfriend downloads porn all the time and who really cares?

But at the end of the day, if someone lies to their partner that's a shitty thing to do. It has nothing to do with men wanting to protect their girlfriends and everything with men wanting to continue watching porn without consequences.

If you watch porn, be honest when asked. Your partner can then either make the choice to accept it or to break up with you. If they refuse to accept it, break up with THEM. Be honest until you find someone who doesn't care.

@cork

Agreed wholeheartedly.

Cue: "But being a man is haaaaaard. Waaaahhh."

Cork,
That's the ideal, and in a perfect world that is what would happen.

And as I said, if women made this criteria clear up front before a guy gets too invested in them then that is most likely what would happen.

But you and I both know that isn't what happens. It doesn't happen with just porn. Kinks, special circumstances, and pretty much anything out of the norm is typically kept out of the light in hopes that by the time it comes out the person will have gotten to know all the positives of the individual in question and be more accepting of what ever it is.

It makes logical sense, but has its drawbacks.

Not many woman go on about how they don't like porn and don't want to date a guy who looks at porn on the first date. Or the second date. Or even the third date.

They wait until they feel things are going someplace. But by that point the two are already invested in each other. The guy may think that this girl is right in every way if only she wouldn't be such a nag about porn.

The anti porn attitudes typically only get expressed AFTER an emotional investment is made.

So yes, your ideal scenario is the best, but it requires the woman to be up front from the start about what she wants and doesn't want, giving the guy the option to back away BEFORE getting invested in her.

If a woman expresses her anti porn wants right off the bat and the guy still wants to go out with her and promises not to watch porn, then he is getting what he is asking for.

But if a woman waits until she knows the guy is already getting hooked on her to roll out the demands and conditions then she is getting what she is asking for as well.

But no, the attitude isn't, "men lie and women should get over it".

The attitude is that people often find themselves in situations where they feel that the small white lie is the less severe of the options, and that if you don't want your partner to lie then don't put them in a situation where you are setting it up so that the lie seems like the best option.

And just to be clear, women aren't the only one's who do this. It's just that with this particular scenario of porn watching it is far more likely to be a woman's issue than a man's. But men can do the same kind of thing and the same advice holds true.

If you don't want to be lied to by your spouse then don't lay unreasonable expectations on them, and let them know about anything that you should know they have a good chance of bristling about BEFORE you lure them into getting emotionally invested in you.

If it were a scenario of a man doing the same kind of thing to a woman I would say the same to him. Because men can be insecure and controlling too, and women lie too.

And sometimes those are also understandable, little white lies because the man is being unreasonable and it just seems like the best option than constantly fighting over something.

Thanks for addressing sex therapy, as it is indeed a really needed field yet there are so many therapists out there who have no training.

Fortunately, we are living in a culture where people are feeling more empowered to seek help for their sex lives. Hopefully, with articles like these the discussion will continue in helping people find the right resources for their issues.

Rachel
Medical Center for Female Sexuality
NY, NY

No Fortunate, you're wrong.

"If you don't want to be lied to, don't make unreasonable expectations" completely neglects to recognize that we are all responsible for the choices we make. If you choose to be unreasonable about porn viewing, you might get dumped; if you choose to lie about porn viewing, you might get caught.

"But if a woman waits until she knows the guy is already getting hooked on her to roll out the demands and conditions then she is getting what she is asking for as well."

Wow, really? I'm pretty sure that in the real world of relationships we generally talk about our feelings about things as situations arise. Neglecting to mention that I have a problem with porn until the topic comes up isn't being sneaky, it's being normal. Sometimes the goalposts have to shift for a relationship to continue. You either both agree to the change or one (or both!) of you declines to continue playing. It's gross and douchey to agree to change the rules but still secretly play the game the old way.

Sometimes we don't learn about our partners' limits on a certain topic until we've been together awhile. That's how relationships work. If a partner sets a limit with us and we aren't douches, we either respect that limit or we be honest and let them know we have no plans to do so. If we lie and say we're going to respect the limit and then don't, we have 100% of the responsibility for being a douchebag.

"but I'm emotionally invested!!" Apparently not enough to be honest with your partner!

@Fortunate:

But most women who want their partners not to look at porn don't know that this is an unreasonable request. They don't wait on purpose until the partner is emotionally invested to discuss this topic.

No, for them it is completely "normal", "natural" or whatever that a guy does not watch porn while in a relationship. So it doesn't even occur to them that it might be a topic that needs discussing on one of the first dates.

This is different to kinky people/ fetishists who usually KNOW that they require something unusual.

Dan - sex addiction IS a myth, and is yet another way in which male homosexuality is attacked. Sadly, even though the APA has yet again rejected this pseudodiagnosis, many media and online sources such as WebMD continue to present it as real. The more public figures such as yourself stand up and call this a fraud, the more the public can see that they are being deceived.

@139, "No Fortunate, you're wrong.

"If you don't want to be lied to, don't make unreasonable expectations" completely neglects to recognize that we are all responsible for the choices we make. If you choose to be unreasonable about porn viewing, you might get dumped; if you choose to lie about porn viewing, you might get caught. "

Where am I wrong? Show me where I said that if a man lies about viewing porn he doesn't have to worry about getting caught?

I never, ever, even once hinted, that if a guy lies about porn and gets caught that there is no, or should be no, repercussions.

Of course there are. If a woman puts unreasonable demands on a man then he most likely is going to lie about it.

If he lies about it he may get caught.

These things are fairly self evident.

"Wow, really? I'm pretty sure that in the real world of relationships we generally talk about our feelings about things as situations arise. Neglecting to mention that I have a problem with porn until the topic comes up isn't being sneaky, it's being normal."

If it's such an issue that it will cause you great distress to find a guy watches porn then it isn't normal. That's not rational or normal.

"Sometimes we don't learn about our partners' limits on a certain topic until we've been together awhile."

Sure, but dealbreaker issues shouldn't be ones you have to wait long to find out. Deal breaker issues aren't normal issues. They are special, important issues that should be laid out on the table up front.

"If we lie and say we're going to respect the limit and then don't, we have 100% of the responsibility for being a douchebag. "

If you lie and get caught then you face the consequences. But I find it funny that you argue that the dynamics of relationships are complex enough to excuse a woman for not being upfront about specific, deal breaking limitations right off the bat, but then simplify the dynamics of relationships to ignore that sometimes a partner creates a situation that invites dishonest behavior and that they share the blame.

""but I'm emotionally invested!!" Apparently not enough to be honest with your partner! "

No one is 100% completely honest with their partner.

"No, this isn't a new dress, I had it in the back of my closet and haven't worn it in forever."

"No dear, I never look at other women's breasts."

We all lie at some point. And often we lie BECAUSE we are emotionally invested.

Sorry, YOU'RE wrong.

@140,"But most women who want their partners not to look at porn don't know that this is an unreasonable request. They don't wait on purpose until the partner is emotionally invested to discuss this topic."

Their intent ends up being rally irrelevant.

Sure, some folks don't realize that their request is unreasonable. But at some point they should get the clue.

When you find that your request is unreasonable you don't still insist on it. You deal with what ever issue you have about it.

Not everyone who has a fetish realizes it before then get involved with someone. But once you realize it you have to accept that if it is a fetish too far you can't demand your partner indulge you in it.

Because you know that when these things are presented they aren't presented as a discussion. They are presented as a demand, not something that can be negotiated. If they were then a reasonable compromise would be negotiated and very few would feel the need to lie.

" So it doesn't even occur to them that it might be a topic that needs discussing on one of the first dates."

And in that case when it does come up then that is what it should be. A discussion. Not a demand, and not emotional manipulation ("you can do what you want, but know that when you do you make me cry").

"This is different to kinky people/ fetishists who usually KNOW that they require something unusual."

Not really. If you have been reading and listening to Dan you should know that lots of people don't recognize their kinks and fetishes until later on. Some know and some don't. If you discover something later on then you have to own responsibility for dealing with it in a rational and reasonable way.

""
"No dear, I never look at other women's breasts."

We all lie at some point. And often we lie BECAUSE we are emotionally invested."

Then you're doing it wrong, sorry. If a man lies and says he never looks at another women's breasts, that's fucked up. If he does it, he needs to own it. Women can either live with that, ask him to change, or dump him.

I can't for the life of me fathom why anyone would want to be in a relationship with someone they can't be honest with. If my boyfriend freaked out when I look at another dude's ass, I would dump him for being a childish douche. I'm emotionally invested in him, but the reason I'm invested is because *he's not a douche.* If he suddenly becomes one my emotional investment (and my boyfriend) will go right out the window.

We don't lie because we're emotionally invested, we lie because we're cowards. I'm emotionally invested in my partner and that means I take the risk of telling the truth. Lying is easy and it doesn't have anything to do with emotional investment.

@130: Okay, for the sake of argument, stay away from the phrase "batshit crazy." That does not mean abandoning the idea of asserting that behavior is completely unreasonable and controlling.

Part of the problem is that the anti-porn crowd long ago seized the rhetorical moral high ground, and merely refuting them is to fight an uphill battle, because it is arguing the case on their terms. To investigate the issue in terms of exploring and soothing the anti-porn person's insecurities is still to frame the debate with a fundamental assumption that porn is wrong and threatening to the relationship.

The proper stance should be a robust and unapologetic assertion along the lines of: "Masturbation is something that falls entirely within the sphere of personal privacy and bodily autonomy. It is something that I do in private, by myself, for myself, and nobody else* is involved. Telling me how I may and may not masturbate is about as invasive and controlling as telling me what music I may and may not listen to on my iPod, or whether and how I may pick my nose in private. If you think you should exercise that kind of control over my bodily sovereignty, there's the door. Your period to rethink your stance starts right now."

*(If that is their cue to say "what about the porn?" the response should be: "No, a picture or a movie is not another person. It is an inanimate object. I assure you I know the difference, and I suggest you get clear on the distinction.")

This still leaves room to deal with things like webcamming or visiting strip clubs, neither of which arguably count as simply "looking at porn."

@mydriasis: I love the assumption here that everyone watches porn so wanting a partner who doesn't watch porn is super unreasonable.

It's not unreasonable because everyone watches porn, it's unreasonable because watching porn is, in the vast majority of cases, a harmless and healthy activity that poses no threat to one's partner.

Look, if I had a hangup about vibrators, I'd certainly be within my rights to seek female partners who don't use them. But I wouldn't call that "reasonable", I'd call it what it is - a hangup.

@139, I agree.

There is probably a middle of the road standard for what should and should not be discussed prior to investing ones self into a relationship. One can't nit-pick all the details in advance. On the other hand, there are a few things it is commonly accepted to discuss before hopping in the sack or moving into shared housing.

At the outset, I like to ask a few questions usually guaranteed to raise a few eyebrows. BDSM? Anal sex? Its the reaction to the questions that I'm interested in, not so much the actual answer. Can my potential partner calmly discuss the topic and state her position on it? Or will an emotional scene ensue due to my 'insensitivity'? Neither of these kinks are things that I'm overly attached to, so 'No thanks' is a perfectly acceptable answer. I'd just rather have the important issues covered calmly beforehand, rather than have my partner freak when the handcuffs and butt plugs come out.

Porn could very well be an issue with some people. But that makes it all the more important to discuss at the outset of a relationship. True, there are some people that don't know themselves and react badly to a new situation. But that's what relationships are about. People will grow within them.

I do have a minor problem with the unaddressed issue of porn. Porn is mainstream enough that encountering it shouldn't be a surprise. A goat and jar of peanut butter I can understand as being unexpected.

I usually agree with Dan, but this CPOS is just a CPOS.

Adults END relationships before they start new ones. Children do not.

"I can't for the life of me fathom why anyone would want to be in a relationship with someone they can't be honest with. If my boyfriend freaked out when I look at another dude's ass, I would dump him for being a childish douche. I'm emotionally invested in him, but the reason I'm invested is because *he's not a douche.* If he suddenly becomes one my emotional investment (and my boyfriend) will go right out the window."

See, we all have our priorities.

If the only issue you had with your boyfriend was that he got upset when you looked at another guys ass you would rather dump him than just pretend you didn't look at another guys ass?

Seriously?

See, we all have our values, and by my values (and apparently a lot of other people's) that's fucked up.

"If the only issue you had with your boyfriend was that he got upset when you looked at another guys ass you would rather dump him than just pretend you didn't look at another guys ass? "

If looking at other dudes' butts bothers him THAT badly, I'm not a very good person if I promise to never look at another dude's butt ever again and then still do it. At that point I know I'm doing something that harms my partner. I choose not only to do it anyway, but to lie about it so they can't make an informed decision about whether or not they can adjust to it.

So no, I wouldn't dump my boyfriend out of hand, but I wouldn't lie about it either. I'd (shock, gasp!) negotiate to what is hopefully a mutually satisfying agreement. Does he want me to not openly ogle asses when he's around? Does he want me to be more discreet? Does he want me to reassure him more often that I think his ass is the best ass of them all? Ok, cool. I can do some or all of those things, and in exchange I get to ogle booties with his blessing. Everybody wins!

If, on the other hand, there was no middle ground on the issue and no matter what I did my boyfriend was going to be hurt by this, I have two choices. I can 1. lie about it like a douche, or 2. keep doing it and tell him 'sorry, but if you don't like it you have the choice to leave.'

Option 2 is what assertive adults with good communication skills do. Option 1 is what's done by cowards who are afraid of consequences. Option 2 shows respect for my partner by being honest and accepting his right to make choices for himself, while option 1 is a childish attempt to have my cake and eat it too.

Seems like we are all agreed that porn habits and our opinions thereof should be a topic that comes up on the first (or second or third) date. Single men who like porn -- you need to bring that up. Never mind that it might make you seem strange. Single women who object -- you need to bring that up, never mind that it might make you seem controlling.

I guess I got lucky. My husband and I laid all our cards on the table the first night we met. Not everything came up, but we knew what we were getting into. He knew I'd need therapy, I knew he'd need (redacted). We've had our fair share of conflict, but nobody was "tricked" into this relationship.

Do so many people really hide their true selves in order to get into relationships?

"Option 2 is what assertive adults with good communication skills do."

Options 2 is what is done by people who would rather be right than happy. Option 2 is short sighted. Option 2 throws out the baby with the bathwater.

Option 1 doesn't hurt anyone so long as you are discrete.

Option 1 is the option for people who recognize that no one is perfect and is willing to appreciate the good and work around the not so good.

If we believe our partner's expectations are unreasonable how do we help the situation by saying "sure honey, I'll totally do what you're asking!" That's only reinforcing an unreasonable expectation.

Let's use another example.

Bob and Mary are in a relationship. Bob wants kids someday and Mary doesn't. But Mary is "emotionally invested" in Bob. Mary doesn't want to break up with Bob, and she doesn't want Bob to break up with her. When Bob tells Mary he wants kids, Mary says "Sure! Me too!" even though Mary knows she will never want kids. Mary hopes that Bob will just forget about the issue over time, or that he'll someday change his mind.

Is that ok? Or is Mary being a huge douche?

If you believe your partner's expectations are unreasonable you tell them that. But if they still decide to adhere to their expectations anyway you have to make a choice.

You have to look at what else they offer and decide if it you are willing to just walk away from that, or if you are willing to find some way to deal with it.

One of the ways of dealing with it might be to tell a white lie about, particularly if what you are lying about isn't something that can actually cause them harm (not like lying about cheating, where you may end up bringing home a disease or creating another little person).

I don't think that unreasonable requests should go unchallenged. Not at all. But in the end the other person is either going to come to a place where they can be reasonable about it, or they aren't.

We are all irrational about something sooner or later. We can all be "batshit crazy" on some subjected eventually.

We can either accept that when it happens and try to make a work around, or we just walk away from everything else because of what can be an insignificant flaw in the other person if we choose to see it that way and treat it as such.

We fundamentally disagree on what makes a good workaround. (initially I typed "good reacharound," which changes the point quite a bit!)

A white lie means a lie that's insignificant or trivial. Porn might be trivial to me, but if it's not trivial to my partner than I'm not telling a white lie-- I'm just lying.

Cork is on fire right now.

Seriously, thank you.

I am beyond disgusted by the whole "what she don't know can't hurt her and I get to decide what is legitimate pain and what is crazy unreasonable pain I can dismiss on a whim" attitude displayed here.

@cork118: As @Fortunate says, people who are otherwise reasonable and generous can be unreasonable and dig in their heals around certain pet issues and peeves. If person is being stubborn and overbearing about an issue that has no real consequence aside from the fact that it bothers that person, they have created a situation in which lying is a reasonable workaround to the pointless and oppressive acrimony that direct confrontation would bring.

@seandr

Some might consider that to be an incredibly manipulative and condescending way to go about a romantic relationship.

As opposed to actually... gosh, I don't know, loving and respecting your partner?

@157 I think I love you

" Porn might be trivial to me, but if it's not trivial to my partner than I'm not telling a white lie-- I'm just lying."

By that rational there are no such things as white lies. All lies are significant to someone and so we must all speak 100% truth.

And all end up single because there is no relationship that can survive 100% truth.

@cork118 and @mydriasis:
So, what's the longest that you and your uncompromising value systems have lasted in a relationship?

@mydriasis: No one likes to be treated like a crazy person, least of all those who are actually behaving like one.

"Some might consider that to be an incredibly manipulative and condescending way to go about a romantic relationship.

As opposed to actually... gosh, I don't know, loving and respecting your partner?"

Yes, because when your partner has a hang up they can't get over the loving and respectful thing to do is to dump their ass or tell them to stuff the tears and deal with the fact that you are going to do what it is that upsets them.

Because that's so loving.

"I am beyond disgusted by the whole "what she don't know can't hurt her and I get to decide what is legitimate pain and what is crazy unreasonable pain I can dismiss on a whim" attitude displayed here. "

Sorry, but while there are some areas where what is legitimate and what is crazy may be blurred, not every situation is ambiguous.

A guy watching porn is not something that is rational to get so upset about.

When what she does know will definitely hurt her, then her not knowing may be the best thing if there is no actual harm. Porn doesn't invite disease, unwanted children, or in anyway bring physical harm or an inherent undermining of the relationship with it.

Porn can be a problem depending on how the individual chooses to interact with it, but not inherently.

But when you know the truth is only going to hurt the other person, and if you are honest it will only destroy the relationship even though it really doesn't have to, then forcing the other person into that scenario is not loving.

The idea that the only way to respect someone is to always tell the truth is BS. Sometimes a lie is a kindness. Not always, and maybe not even most of the time. But at times it is, and this scenario is one of them.

Because, "here's the way it is. Now you can go cry somewhere else or get out" is not love, and it is not respect when you have the option of "alright, I won't do that thing that causes no inherent harm to anyone" followed by honest effort to not get caught doing that thing.

NON-ADDICT might also find the Secular Therapist Project useful. While not all of the therapists are necessarily going to be sex-positive, sex-negativity is frequently linked to religious attitudes and sexual judgement to (implicit) evangelism, so ze might find it a good place to start looking.

I'm surprised to see so many people advocating for dishonesty in this thread.

Dan advocates discretion in his answer above, and that's fine... But lying to your partner about porn is not OK. It's not a "white lie," it's an obfuscation of your sexual identity.

Besides the obvious disadvantages of dishonesty in general, lying about porn to your partner also perpetuates the stigma associated with porn. Lying about porn to your partner moves you away from a sex-positive space into a closeted, shame-filled sexuality. Lying about porn to your partner: No bueno.

I say this as a hetero guy in a long-term monogamous relationship, btw. Guys: If you can't be honest with your girlfriend about your use of porn, either examine how much you need that porn or DUMP YOUR GIRLFRIEND. She may be your sexual partner, but she doesn't own your sexuality. You do.

And ladies: Get over it, unless you think it's OK for your partner to police your fantasy life too.

Telling the lie is implicit in Dan's advocating discretion. Being discrete when your girlfriend is dead set against you looking at porn means not letting her know you look at porn. A lie.

Yes, lying about it may perpetuate the stigma associated with it. But if she isn't going to budge then she isn't. You don't have to use your personal relationships as the battle ground for every single sex related issue plaguing society.

And sorry, but I don't think most people see looking at porn as anything even remotely related to their sexual identity. For most people looking at porn is what they do, not who they are.

Again, you want to either rub her nose in it or dump her, even if everything else in the relationship is good? This is really worth ending an otherwise good relationship, or callously inflicting emotional distress for?

Look, no one is saying this is an ideal situation. But as shocked as everyone is that some of us would advocate lying in this circumstance (and again, this is a lie about looking at porn, not cheating with someone, stealing money from the joint account, doing crystal, etc... It's looking at porn), I find it equally shocking that so many people are advocating callously hurting your partner or dumping her as the only reasonable options. And that doing this to her is seen as a good, positive thing.

@Fortunate:
You see this as very black&white. It's either dumping her or lying to her. What about agreeing to disagree and then to promise to be discreet?

If she can't live with that compromise, she will probably not be able to compromise on the really important things down the line. And while the LW is still obviously quite young, imagine her and her bf having children. How will they agree on what values to teach their children regarding sexuality? Will she tell their children that porn has no place in a relationship, while he tells them behind her back otherwise? Or will he lie to them as well and mess up the expectations of the next generation?

I find it equally shocking that so many people are advocating callously hurting your partner or dumping her as the only reasonable options.

Yeah... I find it shocking that so many women think they can control their partners' fantasy lives. To me, it's a dumpable offense. But then, I enjoy living my life openly and without shame. I'm not interested in lying about who I am (or, as you would have it, "what I do").

You don't have to use your personal relationships as the battle ground for every single sex related issue plaguing society.

It seems pretty common around here when the sexes are reversed.

"You see this as very black&white"

I'M seeing this as black and white??? I'm not in the "if she doesn't share your ideas on porn then hurt her or dump her" camp. THAT'S pretty black and white if you ask me.

"What about agreeing to disagree and then to promise to be discreet?"

This whole discussion is predicated on that not being an option. If promising to be discreet is a satisfactory option then there is no problem to begin with.

The problem in the scenario IS that being discreet isn't good enough.

"If she can't live with that compromise, she will probably not be able to compromise on the really important things down the line"

That's not necessarily true.

One hang up does not make for a completely dysfunctional person. One area of blindness, one subject that can't be dealt with in complete rationality, does not necessarily equate to a whole bundle of issues.

Really, I find it funny that I get slammed for referring to the irrational distress over porn as "batshit crazy", yet I seem to be one of the few who doesn't see this one area of irrationality as an overall indictment against her ability to otherwise conduct a relationship in a reasonable and rational manner.

She very well may be able to function in all other ways as a perfectly rational, compromising, and reasonable partner.

You don't discount the whole diamond because it has a slight flaw in it. If we did we would all find our asses out on the street sooner or later.

"It seems pretty common around here when the sexes are reversed. "

Common perhaps. But not necessary. And it certainly shouldn't be an obligation for everyone.

Look, no one is saying that if you don't want to have to hide your porn watch, and that is a line in the sand that YOU want to draw, that you must lie about it and doing it in hiding.

For you dumping her might be the best option for you if that is how you feel.

What you and others don't seem to get is that it might not be the best option for everyone. Not everyone feels as strongly about taking a stand and being as open about this one thing as you are.

Hey, I fully support you doing what you feel you need to in order live as you feel best for you.

All I'm saying is that lying about something relatively trivial like saying you won't look at porn when your girlfriend is not capable of being rational about it is not the worst offense in the world. It may not be an ideal situation, but it's understandable.

And I'll say it again. We ALL lie about the little things we don't think are serious. Even if it is something as simple as "no, that dress doesn't make you look fat at all!"

We all do it now and then. This is a trivial lie in the big picture.

"Trivial" is disagreeing about whether or not TNG or the original Star Trek is the better series.

Issues that relate to sexual satisfaction in the context of a sexual relationship aren't really trivial.

Maybe that's just me, but I doubt it.

It seems like the easiest way to avoid years of deception (and the eventual fight and/or breakup when the deception is discovered) is honesty.

Porn watching is trivial. You can't equate watching porn with issues like lack of sexual satisfaction with your partner, or having an unmet sexual need.

It's porn. It's often a solo experience. It's only not trivial if you really feel the need to enjoy porn With your partner.

Disagreeing about Star Trek, on the other hand, is a divorce worthy disagreement, so clearly you need to sort out your priorities.

Will there be an argument down the road (About porn. Hopefully not about Star Trek)? Probably.

But long enough down the road and you probably aren't going to break up over it. In fact long enough down the road she may actually realize that you've been watching porn all this time and haven't left her, cheated on her, or put down the size of her breasts because they aren't as big as the latest hot porn star's, and get over it on her own, in her own time.

I think the answer here is to assign both sides to write an essay on A Fairly Honourable Defeat and Julius King's thesis that any two people can be parted by the application of the correct pressure on the relationship, crossed with Pride and Prejudice and Charlotte Lucas' assertion that happiness in marriage is entirely a matter a chance.

What this really means is that I can't decide whether Ms Cork or Mr Fortunate is more correctly comparable to Rupert Foster.

Ms Cute, do you think that Sir Quentin Oliver of Loitering With Intent applies here?

@kitschnsync: advocating for dishonesty

Not all dishonesty is the same. In this particular instance, it was a small act of rebellion against a tyrannical regime. Or a sub against his dom, if you prefer.

Look, I'm just trying to help the LW out. If she can learn to tolerate porn, which is something she's certainly capable of doing, her relationships with men will be richer and more rewarding.

Aha! I have found a Useful Parallel Situation.

From a post of Ms Hopkins in the Twink thread:

[I know at least a few guys who identify as gay, but I they're bi. Know some of their lady exes, have heard them comment on this that or t'other woman, etc. (Not confusing lady exes w/ ladies some guys would date in an attempt to look/be straight.) They'd cop to being bi if it wouldn't make their (sometimes misogynistic) husbands crazy; a couple of them have told me as much.]

Mr Fortunate? Ms Cork? Anyone else?

Mr. Ven,
You know, I started Loitering With Intent several years ago, but failed to get into it, and stopped early, so I don't know or remember the character.

Hey Dan, I'd like to kick your ass. Get back in the closet.

Vennominon,

I don't see that as a parallel.

That IS sexual identity. Lying about watching porn is in no way in the same class as lying about your sexual orientation. One is a small white lie about something you do that doesn't have any impact on the other person except in their head.

The other is lying about who you are.

Being gay and being bi are not the same thing, and while no two people have the same experience no matter the orientation, there is a certain commonality to most gay peoples' experiences if they are from the same country that is different from what a Bi person's experiences are likely to be.

One is a small white lie about a harmless vice. The other is a fundamental lie about who you are and where you are coming from.

Mr Fortunate - Well, it gave you a nice framework with which to make your point; good enough for me.

I might go so far as to guess that you wouldn't get emotionally invested without having talked through enough to know, even if you didn't frame the actual question. But I could see it not coming up until there was an emotional investment, and I could imagine the thought process of someone who decided, given the state of the relationship, to keep quiet about a point of identity that might strike him as different than it does you. I'm not really on any particular side here, just envisioning possibilities. And I rather imagine that, for a good many monogamous men who round identity in either direction, bisexuality might be less likely to be found out than porn watching.

You would be right in your guess.

As I suggest to the women who have an issue with porn, I was always very fast to get to the issue of sexual orientation, and to make it clear that it is important to me.

By the time any emotional investment was made they would know that this was an issue for me and would have had more than enough chance to bow out before anything got serious.

Because I know that for a lot of people it doesn't matter, and I wouldn't necessarily assume that the person I was with would realize I might have an issue about it, so I pretty much always laid my cards on the table early on.

It saves a lot of grief for everyone that way.

What's confusing me, as I read along, is why Fortunate keeps saying that the guy's choice is between:
a) lying to, or
b) dumping his girlfriend.

Isn't the choice rather between
a) lying to your girlfriend or
b) allowing her the option of leaving a relationship she doesn't like?

Fortunate@163: "when your partner has a hang up they can't get over the loving and respectful thing to do is to dump their ass or tell them to stuff the tears and deal with the fact that you are going to do what it is that upsets them....Because that's so loving."

When a partner steps all over my boundaries, the loving thing to do is talk it out, explain my boundaries, and see if my partner can figure out how to deal with adult boundaries. If my boyfriend told me not to talk to my interfering mother anymore, would it be better to lie and pretend I never talk to her, so I can maintain a wonderful relationship with the boyfriend?

migrationist@167: yes, exactly.

seandr @174:
"Look, I'm just trying to help the LW out. If she can learn to tolerate porn, which is something she's certainly capable of doing, her relationships with men will be richer and more rewarding."

She can only learn to tolerate porn if her partner is honest with her.

@154 cork118: You've got a point: if Mary really doesn't want kids, she should be up front with Bob, even if it means that he might dump her for somebody willing to have kids.

I was straight up with my abusive former spouse about not wanting to have children. He adamantly wanted kids--for the stupidest reasons (i.e.: "because all my friends have kids"; "I'll hold your hand in the delivery room!"; "Because I want kids!", etc.)--but still married me, anyway. I had to assert myself no end against my emotional train wreck husband, his equally belligerent parents, idiotic younger sisters, and his clueless male friends----none of whom would have been subjected to bearing any "expected" children.
This and so many other valid reasons are why I'm so glad to be unmarried and remain childless by choice now.

re: @186: And no, I am not the least bit bitter. I'm just glad to be out of that insanely messed up relationship, and happily on with my life.
Lesson learned: If I'd had to do it all over again (perish the thought!), I never would have gotten married in the first place.

Atkins Update (for anyone interested): I'm losing important inches; my once-formidable "Buddha belly" is almost completely gone! I'm going to need new clothes!

Best of all, I think my new ND-prescribed diet change helped me solve an additional problem: no more excruciatingly painful, batshit crazy menstrual periods! From now on, I'll just be crazy.

@188: No, the likely route to a healthy, well-adjusted life is to learn from one's own mistakes and that hopefully, history does not repeat itself.
Goodnight, Hunt.

So, what's the longest that you and your uncompromising value systems have lasted in a relationship?

Wowww, bitter.

Listen, not everyone needs to lie to make themselves appealing to a partner.

@EricaP: allowing her the option of leaving a relationship she doesn't like?

If she was actually going to leave him over this, OK. But come on, she's not going walk away from an otherwise good relationship because he likes to look at pictures of naked ladies.

More likely, his honesty would simply be met with yet another pointless fight as it clearly has in the past. She'll lob some shame and guilt at him, threaten him with abandonment, withhold affection for a week or to, and eventually get over it after making him promise again that he'll stop. And round they go.

In the end, the relationship would probably improve if he can overcome his fears of being abandoned by her and stand up to her directly. But if he isn't ready for that, I'm not going to judge him.

@mydriasis: Apologies - my question was perhaps a tad belligerent.

Still, I'd love the hear the answer. My experience tells me that making a relationship last beyond its second decade entails relaxing one's rules and requirements and developing a tolerance for interpersonal messiness. (None of this has anything to do with making oneself appealing.)

If you've found otherwise, do tell.

@194 you don't judge people for choosing option 2a (@182) rather than 2b. Fine. All I was pointing out was that these were the options, rather than 1a and 1b (dumping porn-averse girlfriend), as Fortunate kept saying.

In practice, I think that repeatedly choosing 2a (lying, getting caught, lying, getting caught) ends up being a lot like choosing 2b. Which is close to what you're saying @195, if I understand correctly.

Ms Erica - The interfering mother is an interesting example. It could depend on specifics. The original thought is to wonder whether you could successfully conceal the offending contact - only calling, say, during breaks at work. But it seems probable that the request would only be made as a result of how you become after contact with Mama E, especially if the request were to sever contact completely instead of just to do it out of sight, which would seem more likely if the problem were that you were calling Mama E ten times a day and the calls were consuming too much of your time for doing other things. It seems highly likely that you'd trigger the radar.

I thought the anti-bi-partner situation an interesting comparison in part because, as the example of Ms Hopkins' friends attests, it's potentially easily concealed, and in part because the prejudice can often be unreasonable at origin (say, a monogamous bisexual person might have a monosexual partner who thinks bi people incapable of monogamy). There's always a case to be made that openness helps extinguish prejudice, but a lot of people appear to have decided that a concealment that is of no material personal hardship (in their private opinions) is a worthwhile cost to preserve freedom from this particular source of drama in their relationships.

I can't change my mind on this one, as I have no pre-existing opinion to change.

@197, don't bring in factors which make it reasonable to object to the behavior. I brought up banning calls to mom as an unreasonable, controlling gesture, equivalent to banning a partner's healthy use of porn.

I believe it's better if both parties refuse unreasonable requests, rather than agree to them and then become a sneak.

Ms Cute - I'm almost surprised, but can imagine that you disliked Fleur Talbot enough to abandon the book. I wish I could give up books, but I always soldier on.

You probably didn't get far enough to reach the catch phrase, "Sir Quentin insists on complete frankness," which is uttered to Fleur in various turns and no particular order by her frenemy Dottie, Beryl Mrs Timms, Maisie Young, Sir Eric Finlay, Lady Bernice "Bucks" Gilbert and la Baronne Clotilde du Loire. Only Mrs Wilks and Father Egbert Delaney are let off, presumably because no private conversation Fleur has with either of them is ever given. It probably starts about 3/8 of the way through and repeats well into the final quarter of the novel, as Sir Quentin starts needling the members of the Autobiographical Association and trying to insert into their real lives predetermined fates that he lifts right out of Fleur's novel Warrender Chase.

The novel is full of repetitions of various themes. If you like Benvenuto Cellini or Cardinal Newman, you could find it worth another try. And I found it most interesting in reading a biography of Dame Muriel about a year ago to see how one of the men in her own life served in so many ways as quite a model for Fleur's bisexual lover, Dottie's husband Leslie.

@197 vennominon:
The best analogies I can think of would be a husband who forbids his wife from using vibrators or dildos to masturbate, or forbids her from reading erotic literature.

Perhaps we can all agree that such behavior would make him a controlling, insecure creep.

@Mr. Ven.
Okay, you had me at "repetitions of various themes." When you threw in Cardinal Newman, I was persuaded to give it another chance. When I get a chance . . . or the time.
I used to feel an obligation to finish all books (and movies) that I started, but now I subscribe to the motto "life's too short" which allows me to just stop. I've never regretted the stopping and I can always change my mind and pick the book in question up again if I decide I missed out on something.

Seems to me the letter-writer so conflates masturbation, porn, and paid sexual interaction that it's totally not clear what she's objecting to. I mean, "caught him there with his dick in his hand" sounds as though she'd have been upset even had he been masturbating to nothing more than his own fevered imagination. I think we can all agree that objecting to a partner masturbating is way, way over the line. OTOH, whatever the heck "interactive porn" is, it doesn't sound like just watching a movie. I think most of us would agree that paying a sex professional to interact with you, even digitally, is a form of unfaithfulness to a monogamous relationship.

@seandr (200)

And I'd advise her to break up with him. I wouldn't be saying 'hey, you better lie so you can hold on to THAT gem'.

Compromise is fine, but there's a difference between compromising likes/wants/preferences - which we all have to do in relationships, and compromising principles about how to treat other human beings. Do we make mistakes and violate those principles? Sure, but there's a difference between making a mistake and consciously deciding that the principle is less important than having what you want.

It's kind of like saying 'hey, sure, rape is wrong, but I mean... how much sex does your uncompromising value system get you?'

In my first relationship, my boyfriend decided to just go for the boob without any warning. We were both part of a conservative religious tradition with a zero-tolerance policy towards porn. When I ran away in tears, he ran after me, and decided to make the "I sinned and watched porn!" confession. As this somehow led to crossing boundaries, the porn made him do it? It only made me cry harder.

This is part of the problem with this attitude in my mind - being virulently anti-porn can lead to an internalized misogyny and sex negativity if taken to an extreme. I'm happier now that I can talk about sexual preferences openly with my current partner, and guess what? Neither of us are super into make-believe porn: we're too busy fucking.

Oh, this same religion also forbids masturbation. Definitely for all unpartnered people, probably for married ones too. So yeah, my vote is that SAD is Mormon. (Insert tasteless Jodi Arias joke here.)

@196, "@194 you don't judge people for choosing option 2a (@182) rather than 2b. Fine. All I was pointing out was that these were the options, rather than 1a and 1b (dumping porn-averse girlfriend), as Fortunate kept saying."

If he knows that she will dump him then telling her is the same thing as dumping her. He is doing something that he knows will end the relationship. The only difference is semantics.

As for a spouse telling their partner they can't speak to their mother, that isn't even in the same ballpark.

Either the mother really is interfering and causing problems, in which case you should deal with your mother before it gets to the point that your spouse wants you to stop speaking with her. Or she really isn't and if your partner tries to forbid you from speaking to her pack your bags and get out because trying to prevent you from contacting family is a red flag for an abuser.

So far the only comparable scenario presented is the vibrator or romance novel one.

Otherwise all I need say is, What Seandr said.

"If he knows that she will dump him then telling her is the same thing as dumping her."

Not in my universe. Maybe in the universe of convenient rationalizations and the assumption that people never change when faced with new circumstances.

Yo, I physically need a vibrator to achieve orgasm alone. Like you need your hand.

I don't necessarily need erotica. Porn & erotica can be compared. Not porn & vibrator.

Maybe not in your universe, but in the real universe it is.

If you do something that you know is going to end a relationship, and you do it knowing that, then you are ending the relationship.

I'm not assuming people don't change. Perhaps you should go back and actually read everything I wrote. I discussed that people change, and thats one reason why someone may lie about this issue. Because if they can keep it hidden long enough then when it comes out down the road their partner may be willing to deal with it better.

But if you know they are going to leave if they find out and you tell them then you are initiating the end of the relationship. There is what is happening.