Columns May 22, 2013 at 4:00 am



FirstTimeEver may have the best summary I have ever heard. God, I wish (s)he were my sock puppet. I'd love to claim credit for something that balanced, sensible, decent and articulate.
WSN sounds like a crazy, uptight b----!
@92, for me, it's not the fact that WSN felt traumatized, it's when she felt it. She only felt violated after she found out that her boyfriend had gotten off. This doesn't mean she shouldn't feel violated, just that 7 years in, she's actually still asserting that she was violated, which is absurd on its face. I would feel differently if she'd been upset by the incident itself and not just finding out about her boyfriend's orgasm, but no, that's what she's hung up on. How she felt at the time is not something that she can control, but any adult who's going to spend this much time obsessing about the incident and end up sticking with the "I was abused" interpretation needs to spend some serious time examining how they evaluate their own behavior and its consequences. If WSN really feels the way she says she does about this incident, she does have a serious problem, but it's with herself. Her boyfriend didn't do anything wrong (based on the info in the letter only, of course), and any healthy adult would be well past thinking that police intervention might ever have been appropriate.

I'm not saying that someone her age (or any age) can't get in over his/her head and feel traumatized during any kind of sexual activity, or find that they're moving more quickly than they would have liked. But WSN's letter isn't even about the original incident, it's more about how she's let it damage her life. She's not a bad person because of this, but she needs therapy, and she needs to leave her ex out of it, because it's really not about him at all.
I agree with SilverChimera. I think sometimes people forget just how young fourteen can be. Also I have to say that I think it's possible to learn an awful lot about oneself by probing into cases of "this bothers me a lot even though other people think it's nothing much -- why?" As Cliff Pervocracy said once (I'm quoting from memory here), it doesn't matter if it's all in your head. Your head is where you live.
When Dan recommended that WSN not read the comments column, was it because he knew people would be telling her she was a crazy bitch or because he knew there would be people telling her she really was violated-- even if didn't fit the legal definition?

A note on therapy-- WSN should heed what portland scribe (16) and seeker (96) say about feminism. I still remember the time I was friend to someone who was crying rape with about as much justification as WSN. I suggested therapy, and apparently the therapist convinced my friend that she had to come to terms with the fact that she really had been raped as a ticket to healing. That I didn't want to talk about it with her (it would have meant accusing someone I didn't believe was a rapist) only meant to her that I was a participant in her victimization.
not all feelings are valid; WSN is all out of whack. as a straight female, getting dry humped is a part of life. sometimes it comes with semen and sometimes it doesn't. your sexual hangups are coming from somewhere else than that entire non-incident.

it is seriously not a big deal. i realize this is insensitive, but really. not a big deal.

there are people getting raped and murdered and having acid thrown on their faces you know.
PUNT: I'm married, for the second time, to a man with whom I have enormous shared trust. I would lay my soul bare at his feet. We get along, the sex is wonderful, our fights are sometimes emotional but never abusive. We unite in stressful situations. We've been inseparable since day one, so when he told me three months in that he liked women's clothing, it was a bit surprising - but not very. And it was not at all an issue for me. I'd never dealt with it before, but I was willing to try. Prepare yourself for this reaction: "THAT's what you've been worried about?!" My husband had been treated poorly by the last couple of immature twats he tried to tell, and his relief at my reaction was palpable. That was when we decided to get married.

The hardest part for me personally is that he looks better in his women's clothes than I do in mine, and we're very different sizes so there's no sharing. But it forces me to confront my own self-esteem issues, too, and be more secure in being the person that he loves and trusts.

I'm guessing that the only issue your wife will have is that you didn't tell her sooner.
Feeling violated when making out disturbed at age 14 by a self-chosen boyfriend and then staying together for another two months?
First world problems.
Sorry if this is getting spammy, but I showed my husband your letter. He said, "This is why I tried to tell you early on, rather than have it hang over my head." To which I say, "Better now than never."

I agree with the previous commenter - if she likes Eddie Izzard (or like me, finds him hot) you'll probably be okay.
Gay man here. I've been groped in situations where no groping was desired, have had sex I didn't really feel like having but didn't know how to get out of, have said "yes" to things I've later come to regret. None of that is rape. What makes me mad about LW1 is that she ends up trivializing the horrific reality of sexual assault by rendering it somehow analogous to a teenage dry-hump session that ended awkwardly. Sorry, LW, you don't get a pass from me; we all have the right to interpret our own experiences but sometimes our interpretation is wildly out of whack with reality.

Enlightened response: Talk to a counselor at Planned Parenthood, assuming they have a location close to you. This minimizes the risk of getting advice from a sex negative person.

All this made me want to do was watch 'Jizz in my pants'…
Not so great advice ~ this young lady has been traumatized to the point of hinting she wants the police involved. She is angry and probably with reason.

Maybe the young man is a leach in training but there is a much more likely explanation. This seems far too powerful reaction to teenagers grinding. More likely it finally occurred to her what an earlier trauma was all about and she projected 100% of that rage onto a 14 year old boy.

She should find someone to help sort this all out and only then should she seek an apology from her erstwhile paramour.
I have to agree with 7. Captain Awkward often says that closure is something we give ourselves. I mean what if he apologizes and it still doesn't fix things? And if he is a creep does she really want him back in her life. It might be best to work this out with a therapist.
Re PUNT... this link may provide a clue why many wives react badly to the harmless kink of crossdressing.…
"Common to all self-disclosures was a gradual progression from identification as a cross-dresser to identification as a transsexual."

So this is my first ever comment but it also hits home.

There are a lot of people on here who apparently think dry humping to completion is a standard part of making out. Which it really isn't - 14 or not (dude above who says he dry humps someone if they're not into having sex - I hope you are diligent in making sure they're all right with that...that would annoy the heck out of me.) But I totally get that 14 year old boys cum more easily than adult men (obviously.) But do their oral abilities also get destroyed? What about common courtesy? Unless there's something missing in the letter, the young man in this case didn't warm LW1 when he was getting close to completion (a fairly standard courtesy in my book), didn't offer to reciprocate, got up to clean off, and came back and didn't check in with her or apologize for cumming unexpectedly. Any one of those things would probably have made the girl (who WAS 14 years old, lets remember) much more comfortable in the situation. Instead she just felt like a glorified sex toy.

And I agree with @41 - this isn't even close to an odd situation for teenage girls. At 15 or so I "hooked up" at camp one summer and the young man insisted on touching my crotch over clothes, even after I told him I wasn't comfortable, I think because he thought it was a fun game and I'd come around. If a guy tried that now I'd clock him one, but at the time I was too passive and too new to any form of sex to really say much. Was I sexually assaulted, technically yes, did it have long impact on my psychological well-being - no not really. BUT, every person reacts to trauma (even mild ones) differently; just telling someone they are experiencing an event they experienced as traumatic "wrong" is about as helpful as telling a cancer patient to just get over it.

Look - if there is nothing else we can get out of the news of all these insane gang rapes in Ohio and Canada and what not it is that teenagers need to be taught EARLY what constitutes enthusiastic consent. It shouldn't be considered sufficient consent that your sexual partner isn't pushing you off or saying NO really loudly - there should be more than that. Do you think its unfair for men, having to "make sure" they have consent all the time? Well, women have been told for generations that they have to "make sure" not to get raped - so I guess turnaround is just a little fair play.
@116 - under many definitions of sexual assault - you *have* been sexually assaulted. At least with the groping and arguably with the coercive sex acts (depending on why you agreed.) But you're sort of missing the bigger picture here. You say you've been groped against your will, you've had sex you really didn't want to because you didn't feel empowered to say no and make it stick, and you've said yes to sex acts you weren't entirely comfortable with on more than one occasion. Whether or not these things are defined as rape (and without knowing more its hard to say), I think you could confidently say there have been situations where you have been violated or taken advantage of and THOSE are the precise words LW1 uses. Not rape (not even assault.)

The truth is, LW1's boyfriend used her as an object during their sexual encounter without even running it by her OR offering to reciprocate. She rightfully I think felt taken advantage of. Those are terrible feelings and, yes, she's reacted more strongly than other people might - but different people react different. You can't decide for them whether that's reasonable.

Okay, don't want to rehash too much, I just wanted to post a second time to say to poster 116 that you should really take a look at the things that you've let pass in your sex life and decide at what point you DO draw the line and decide that you've been assaulted or at least unacceptable taken advantage of. Because right now, your line seems pretty far to the side of giving other people power of your sexuality (which is fine if that's something you negotiate with your partner before hand, but that doesn't sound like what you're doing.)

There is no behaviour that is not serious enough to be discussed if one of the involved persons feels the need to discuss it.

That said, there exists a huge difference in severity of sexual assault:
- someone grabs a boob without prior consent out of misguided enthusiasm. As long as the grabber backs off immediately when the grabbee shows her dislike. While the boob-owner may feel violated, there was no intent to harm, and yes, in my opinion, it is a very minor transgression.

- someone grabs a breast not in the heat of the moment but to show the woman her place and to threaten her. That is deeply misogynistic and a completely different situation, even though the physical act that happened is the same.

The problem I see with your approach that feeling violated is enough to blame the "perpetrator" is: feelings are subjective. Some situations can be objectively fine, but someone still feels violated. That means there must be someone who violated the "victim". So, even though the situation was objectively fine, there are suddenly a perpetrator and a victim.

If the situation happened as described by the LW, I don't see any need for the bf to apologise since he did not coerce her. And acknowledgement without apology won't make her find closure, either.

PUNT, also be prepared for your wife to reserve judgement on the cross-dressing and watersports, even if/when she agrees to be GGG about trying them. Neither of those are kinks of mine, and I would be surprised if my husband suddenly brought them up, but I'd be willing to give them a shot . . . probably. But it's also possible that I'd discover I hated them, and then we could move on to the next stage, figuring out a compromise.

I'd actually give you higher odds of getting a positive response if you two already have some D/s play in your sex life, because both of your two bucket list kinks can be "re-packaged" as just one aspect of submission. She may get off on being the dominant one and controlling your access to your kinks more than the kinks themselves, but if that means you get to try them, more power to you :-)
LW1 was entitled to be upset by a new/awkward/uncomfortable experience when she was 14. But being upset by that same experience so many years later?

My first sexual experience was with a guy who was older than me and had enough experience that he DID know what he was doing. It was really uncomfortable. So uncomfortable I cried after he left. And I felt really shitty about it... for about a month. Then I got over it, because I never told him to stop. Did he ask my permission to do any of the things he did? No. But I didn't tell him they weren't Ok either.

So i understand being mildly and briefly traumatized by such an experience at a young age, but in the 7 years that have passed LW1 should have gained some new perspective and gotten the hell over it.
rape is defined as the act of forcing sexual intercourse upon someone. sexual intercourse is defined as sexual contact between individuals involving penetration. seeing as how this 21 year old harpy was never penetrated, and the kissing (sexual act) was entirely consensual, she has no legs to stand on legally and the boy did nothing wrong. these things are a part of growing up. dont want your little hornball pubescent boyfriend grinding up on you while youre making out with him? then dont have a fucking boyfriend. remember the whole point of any kind of romantic relationship is to eventually consumate it with procreation, its the human prime directive. dont wanna procreate? go get a vasectomy, you'd be doing us all a favor with the relativly low average iq america already suffers from....
Idiots like you make me almost want to apologise to shurenka for my misguidedness in my last post.
But EricaP #122, The fact that most B started with A doesn't even suggest, much less indicate, that most A go on to B.
111- Hunter-- No sooner do you ask for the yes-means-yes harpies than they appear. I wouldn't call them harpies. The yes-means-yes contingent is better terminology to me. It's a stand I don't agree with, but thanks to this column, I understand it well.

Something else that might help WSN get over her panickiness is understanding how scarred the rest of us are despite never having been in 14 year old dry hump-cum sessions. If it's not that, it's surely something else. We run around with this idea that if one particular event hadn't happened, then everything would be hunky dory, and we'd never have an awkward moment, we'd orgasm easily, and life would be roses. Truth is, if you hadn't had that upsetting experience when you were 14, you'd probably be complaining that you're 21 and have no experience at all and that you're not prepared for a relationship and you didn't know what a guy coming was like.

Dang it again!
@100 My point was that it is currently a one-way gendered street i.e. it's considered entirely up to girls to say no, while there's no expectation for boys to check that a girl wants to do what they want to do. I understand that your experience of things growing up was different, but I was talking about my experience - and my experience is likely to be a lot closer to WSN's because I'm the same age as her. You said you 'got it' from Christian ideas of chastity on the one hand and feminist ideas about consent on the other - from my experience and perspective, I don't think either of those things are a massive influence on most teenagers now. Girls are expected to want sex, and they're expected to please boys.
I think WSN is a total whack job... i'm a woman. Making out between two 14 year olds sometimes ends in the boy having an accident... if WSN didnt say NO, didnt push him off, didnt ask him what was that hard "thing" in his pants... then she needs to GROW UP... SHUT UP and MOVE ON! She is stuck on something that happened 7 years ago - she needs therapy, not an apology. He probably doesnt even remember the incident and will think (just like i do) that this girl is totally NUTS!
Super unapologetic feminist here, quick to jump up and protest anything demeaning to women.

Did she actually talk about calling the police?! The police. Calling. the police.

I can NOT figure out where WSN is coming from with that. Unless memories of a teenage make out session suddenly inspired her to make a donation to the Police Widows and Orphans Fund or something.
WSN's letter is the reason 'enthusiastic consent' is a bad thing to include in campus sexual codes of conduct, such as this one:…

The enthusiastic consent standard criminalizes normal sex-- and infantilizes heterosexual women by making their partners the default Sole Responsible Adult during sex.
I think WSN is a total whack job... i'm a woman. Making out between two 14 year olds sometimes ends in the boy having an accident... if WSN didnt say NO, didnt push him off, didnt ask him what was that hard "thing" in his pants... then she needs to GROW UP... SHUT UP and MOVE ON! She is stuck on something that happened 7 years ago - she needs therapy, not an apology. He probably doesnt even remember the incident and will think (just like i do) that this girl is totally NUTS!
Ms Shurenka - I'll agree with the spirit of #121 (assuming there is no unspoken "equally" intended in the last sentence; it reads consistently either way). #123 doesn't say anything with which I disagree in terms of theory, but touches on where my reading differs from yours.

[I wanted to explore my sexuality a little, but things went further than I wanted.]

This sentence has bothered me, but only slightly, ever since Tuesday evening. It could be just unfortunate phrasing, but the tone of the letter as printed (we have reason to add disclaimers about how letters may have been edited) gives me a sense that the LW did not pay particular attention to the fact that she was involving another person and the other person's sexuality in her own personal exploration. One might even go so far as to conjure a moral that anyone determined to explore hir own sexuality and not anybody else's would do well to restrict the party to hirself and inanimate objects only.

[I don't want to report him to the police because it's not necessary—it happened so long ago. As far as I'm concerned, it wasn't rape. But I do feel like I was exploited, and it was not consensual.]

This was my major bother. It's not necessary to report him to the police because it happened so long ago? Surely, even if her own complaint is not actionable, it could potentially be useful. If he were the sort of creep who did it deliberately, chances are quite fair that he has been doing the same thing to others for seven years and might well have escalated. That is exactly the reason for the LW at least to find out if he has given others actionable grounds on which to seek legal redress. I don't say that this would give her a duty to come forward, but it's certainly pertinent information. And there's all the more reason to find out at seven years than at ten, fifteen or twenty.

That passage as a whole made me think of Ms Palin fille and her book. I acknowledge that I'm an old cynic, but I suspect Ms P got more left-leaning people to think she was raped by saying she wasn't than she would have done had she said she was. I recall a lengthy feminist-space debate about Ms P's book, which came to the uneasy and non-unanimous conclusion that, "the situation she described sounded [a lot?] like rape." It feels sort of the same here - if one allows for the possibility of rape by accident, one could certainly come to the same conclusion that it's only the LW's entitlement to name her own experience keeping this in the not-rape column. The LW's saying she doesn't want to go to the police struck me as the sort of thing a calculating person would write in order to appear more wronged. I'm willing to accept that she doesn't want him prosecuted, but, as I said earlier, I have a great deal of sympathy with her wanting not to be the only one coming out of their encounter with all the negative baggage. The problem is that, if he was a deliberate creep who deserves the negative baggage, he'll deflect it if she contacts him and she'll only feel worse. If she seeks closure through contact, she'll only get it if he takes over the baggage, which he'll only do if he doesn't deserve it. Closure via therapy seems greatly preferable.

Should we discover pertinent editing, I reserve the right to a mulligan.
are you guys kidding me? LMAO...i only spent like 5 minutes reading all this sh*t..i lied maybe 10..anywayz
@135 - No, it's a two-way gendered street; boys/men are expected to lead in sexual encounters, from asking people on dates to any of the various sorts of sexual touching.

So they're supposed to lead, they're supposed to figure out exactly what their partner wants, and combine that with what they'd want, and do this all perfectly at age 14.

Now, I'm no fan of rape culture, but there's a difference between rape culture and doing something unwanted when they, in a reasonable way, misread the situation.

Now, I'd love it if we lived in a world where men and women were equally expected to lead, and equally expected to be forthright about their sexual wants and needs, but we're not there yet.
Utter BS:…
Hi TinaHD@132
Agreed, and I said that A was harmless. I was just pointing out that wives will find a lot to make them nervous on the internet, since there's to my knowledge no way for the wife to differentiate between A who won't progress to B and A who will progress to B. They all say they won't. Of course that just leaves the wife where everyone always already is: alone in her skull, facing uncertainty and eventually death. Good morning!
I've searched the complete site --- what does "GGG" mean?
Letter writer #1:

Please see a counselor. NOW. An incident from high school/middle school is derailing your sex life - seven years later. This is not healthy...
Yes to Eddie Izzard. Or go rent Priscilla, Queen of the Desert. It's an excellent film as well as being full of men in dresses.
get. the fuck. over it.
@135: "i.e. it's considered entirely up to girls to say no, while there's no expectation for boys to check that a girl wants to do what they want to do." No, @ 142 nails it: “No, it's a two-way gendered street; boys/men are expected to lead in sexual encounters, from asking people on dates to any of the various sorts of sexual touching.”

Both the pre-feminist and feminist approaches often make the same mistake: when one focuses almost entirely on the inarguable idea of a girl's right (old-school, “duty”) to say "no" then you are, sadly, often not arguing -- or negating, or impliedly treating as unimportant or nonexistent -- the girl's right to seek a "yes”. All responsibility for moving romance or sexuality forward is abdicated to the boys/men and that’s not doing anybody any favours.

We are producing (belatedly) a culture in which women’s control over their own sexuality is being reached, whilst still imposing (however impliedly) the notion that they are passive agents in their own sexual life, save for the right of veto. Put bluntly, as long as we subscribe to the “men seek, and women accept or reject” model in our day-to-day lives (and, sadly, for the most part the vast majority of people still do) then we are going to have situations where the boys/men keep pushing up against the boundaries. Why? Because if they don’t then nine-tenths of sexuality stops. Sad, but true. Worse, far worse, this fetishization of the passive produces messes like WSN’s where a pretty ordinary piece of grade 9 fumbling has resulted in a girl who is still freaking out over it years later. There really is no substantive difference between a priest saying, “he touched you when you weren’t sure but didn’t say anything? You’re going to hell!” and a counselor saying “he touched you when you weren’t sure but didn’t say anything? You’ve been violated and you’re damaged and need help!”
I think WSN needs to get over her prim self and move on in life. Leave her 14 year old self back there and leave her then 14 year old boyfriend alone. She shouldn't have been humping with a boy at all if she didn't want him to become aroused. Every person knows what physical contact means. Quit excusing your own 14 year old behavior...or do excuse it and move on.
No shit- WSN sounds like a whiny jerkoff herself- why? Because I've had WAY more horrible sexual experiences before I was 21 and I now am able to comfortably get off without having some "panic" laden attack related to those times. Your friend needs to move on... It's pretty selfish to assume a 14 year old is going to sit around feeling bad about his dry-humping and blurting on his girlfriend at 21 or at ANY age, for that matter! What a bitch. I think you were being nice by telling her not to make contact because she wouldn't get the apology she was looking for- who needs it?
@12 - I think your observation of a basically sex-negative interpretation of adolescent sexual fumbling nails it. Being unable to let go of this experience - which happened half a lifetime ago - points to bigger problems for this young woman.
"But if it wasn't an accident—if your ex-boyfriend was a selfish, manipulative piece of shit at age 14—odds are good that he remains a selfish, manipulative piece of shit at 21."

Really? Who *wasn't* at least sort of a selfish jerk when they were 14? Obviously not everyone engages in rapey behavior at that age, but the notion that being a jackass when you're 14 condemns you to being a shitty adult is a bit ... cold.
^^^^Ditto #153

I mean cum on! "Well I don't wanna call the police on my 14 year old boyfriend of 10 years ago, but I thought about it!"

What a load of crap!
TO THE OP OF CLOSURE (even though Dan told you to stay out of the comments):

I'm not saying that this is relevant to your situation, but your story is so much like mine that I wanted to share something with you. When I was 14 I had a boyfriend who similarly (as all horny 14 year olds do) kept trying to take things as far as he could. I wanted to make out, he wanted his hands on my breasts, etc. etc. A few years later I was reflecting back on that first sexual experience with the boy who became my high school boyfriend, and my first love, and the person I lost my virginity to. I was expressing that I had felt violated by that experience, and shared my story - one that sounded about as harmless as your story sounds - and he reacted by telling me I was being ridiculous. It bothered me because I felt like I had a right to be upset, but I just dropped it and didn't talk to him about it again. Fast forward to my early twenties - I'm having all kinds of difficulty coping with change (moving, starting college, breakup with the high school boyfriend). I started seeing a therapist to work through my emotions. It was through this weekly sessions with a wonderful therapist who I trusted that I started to realize I was projecting some sexual abuse I'd experienced in my very early childhood onto this "first" sexual experience with my boyfriend. The emotions - and ickiness, and feelings of violation - were actually not related to this boy. It was easy for me to associate them with him though, because he was the first boy I'd ever fooled around with and been sexual with, and that sexual awakening led me to feeling dirty and wrong and bad. I had repressed some memories that eventually I was able to recognize, and that began my long journey to healing. I wanted to share my story with you in case something resonates. Maybe it's not a bad idea to talk to a therapist about your feelings and figure out where they are coming from. It may not be abuse in your childhood as in my situation, but it seems you are displacing some feelings for some reason or another. 14 year old boys are inexperienced with their dicks, as Dan pointed out, and are completely sex-crazed and hormone riddled. It doesn't sound like there was a willful violation of your person.
As a woman who has had traumatic sexual experiences herself (unfortunately, how many woman have not had sexual experiences that range from scarring to at best, bone-crushingly awkward). But, with anything in life, you get up and you work through it. It's great that WSN has reached a point that she wants to work through this.

That being said, I think that an apology wouldn't help at all. It seems like she is seeking outside intervention to validate her (the 14 year old, the police, Dan), which seems so much easier than confronting the issue herself.

Dan's advice with the added perspective of a 14 year old boy will hopefully give the added perspective this young woman needs. It sounds like maybe she grew up in a sexually shaming environment and this experience happened at a critical time in her sexual development. So I won't diminish how she feels about it because that's very real. But she should know that she's not alone, and she can successfully move on from this if she confronts it herself.
OK, I'm gay too, so maybe I'm also not familiar with straight mating customs/rituals, but I call bullshit. I firmly agree with the concept that "no means no", but I don't see anywhere in her letter that she said "no" - or even resisted. How the hell was he supposed to know that she wasn't ok with it? In fact, she seemed ok with it until afterward, when she realized he came. (and this is all by HER version of the story). I really can't believe that straight people ask permission for every move. "May I touch your breast?" "Do you mind if I rub against you?" "Would it be ok if I ejaculated in my pants?" Really? Again, if she had given him an indication that it wasn't ok (at the time), I'd have a different opinion. "Get that hand off my tit!" The mere fact that she even contemplated going to the police 7 years later is crazy.
@30: ... An enormous wave rolled through my body, and then another, and then three or four more smaller ones, before I was able to recompose myself, and then I noticed the softness was gone, in her posture, and in her eyes, glaring, and she said "What just happened?", and I said "Well, I.., um...", and she said "Oh my god", pushing me away, "Oh my god, I never agreed to that! You asshole! GET AWAY FROM ME YOU DISGUSTING ASSHOLE!!" and then a light went on behind us, the door opened, her father peering groggily through crack, "What the hell are you two doing up? Is everything OK?" and she said, "No, he's sick! He... I can't even say it it's so disgusting,..." and the father swelled, his footsteps heavy, and I bolted, flying across the street and the schoolyard beyond, and more streets and houses, the awful stickiness following me like a tin can tied to a cat's tail.
re @158 and @159:
These two commenters have, from their position of sad experience, added a key piece of wisdom: a person is entitled to their feelings from bad experiences or experiences that they feel badly about. Those same people are not entitled to have someone else apologize or carry the burden as if they were to blame when they have done nothing wrong. The person who feels bad is entitled to their dignity and to their route to feeling better. They are not entitled to label other people as wrongdoers or seek some sort of ritual confession.
Well, you can't make someone feel better by telling them they shouldn't feel bad and you can't make someone quit over-reacting by telling them they are over-reacting. WSN would probably be the first to admit she's got some issues. I think what she described was probably no big deal but it was to her. I guess I'm going along with the consensus. Don't contact him and see a shrink if you need to. And look carefully in the mirror to see if there aren't bigger issues here. I'm with everyone else who thinks that this is the tip of the iceberg.

Also, even if he is the nicest, most empathetic guy in the world, he'll be crushed if he hears this story, and if he's an asshole he won't care. If someone confronted me over anything I did when I was 14 and they have carried around resentment that long I would find it very strange. I don't remember doing anything bad at 14.
This girl is going to be really upset if she ever finds out someone is whacking it while thinking about her...
It seems to me that if she allowed him to rub up against her, then there was consent. Hoping she'll get herself into counseling to assist her in sorting out the confusion.
This is an incredibly sad letter. Not because the bf of short duration took "advantage" of or "exploited" WSN, but because of her immediate reaction and then lack of one, followed by years of troubled memories.

If she'd said to him she "wanted to explore" her sexuality, but didn't provide any parameters, then what could he do but read her mind. He'd already oopsed that one time when he "groped" her boobs. But he didn't do it again. I'm sure he found it very frustrating to be with a girl who didn't explicitly state her boundaries or offer suggestions on where she wanted the sexual exploration to go. Certainly, dry humping (outercourse) would not be such an emotionally or physically risky thing, as both bodies were clothed.
"I don't want to report him to the police because it's not necessary—it happened so long ago."
This statement really bothers me. It would have been significant if she'd written "I didn't" in the past tense, and thought about reporting it 7 years ago. But, instead, she continued on with this odd uncommunicative relationship for a couple months longer until HE broke up with her. Even if she'd reported it to the police the very same evening, I can't imagine what their reaction would have been then, let alone 7 years later.

It's interesting to note that she doesn't say how long he was on top of her. If this were going on for more than a minute, then she would have had the time to say or do ... something so that he could stop. But she didn't. And only felt violated when she realized what he'd experienced. Against HER body. There's this oddly prim yet narcissistic vibe where she may have expected him to be helping her explore her sexuality without involving HIS body at all.

IMO, I believe she's built up this obsession of him as being this selfish jerk who never apologized to her and then DARED to break up with her. He not only moved on with his life, he moved away. Yet, 7 years later, she knows where he lives and is sure she's likely to find him on Facebook (though I'd bet she already knows it).

When she uses words like "scarred" and "painful", her claim that she's "comfortable" with her sexuality doesn't ring true. When she says she starts "panicking", then it's clear she's suffering from PTSD from having engaged in juvenile sex play when she was too young. Instead of acknowledging it truthfully, she's deflected her discomfort by blaming him entirely. Even if he were to offer an apology, no matter how "sincere", it wouldn't provide her with "closure", because I feel she would then qualify the apology by complaining bitterly that he hasn't suffered the way she did for 7 long years.

I hope she will seek therapy to lessen the impact of these teenage fumblings so that she can indeed move on with her life.
Really? So this is "not uncommon" amongst womenfolk, you say? Guess what, gay man: we straight gals are on your side.

@39 and @40, guess what? I'm old enough to remember when many of "my best pals" routinely justified their homophobia by arguing that our homosexuality was a direct result of our women hating. But welcome to the bandwagon. Better late than never. Here's a clue: just because I can't stand you, and you are a woman, doesn't mean I hate all women. And just because I can't stand women like you, doesn't mean I hate all women. So you can take your conditional support for gay rights and shove it whereever you (consentually) like, for all I care. I can't stand many types of men, too. Does that make me a feminazi?

This letter writer does not deserve to be coddled. She and plenty of people in comments here think it is perfectly acceptable to throw ugly accusations of intentional violation at someone, over something he was probably deeply embarrassed about already. And even contemplating labeling him a predator and criminal for the rest of his life. Get some perspective, bitches. Some ladies just love to get their mind-fuck on.

I think seeker at @96 nailed it as far as catholics go (speaking as a former catholic in full remission). I would love to read his take on those of "my best pals" who see predatory male privilege and rape or quasi-rape in every male-female encounter.
@166: "I'm sure he found it very frustrating to be with a girl who didn't explicitly state her boundaries or offer suggestions on where she wanted the sexual exploration to go."

This line reminded me of that College Humor "Marry Your Girlfriends" sketch some months back, with its line about "all those sweet spots, preferences and fantasies that she's too embarrassed to tell you or that you're supposed to innately know".
Really interesting comments this week. I'm joining the consensus that therapy is probably a good idea for this young woman. Like many of the ladies here (and everywhere really) I too have my share of 'gray area' violations from high school, college, and well into my late twenties. The common thread in ALL of my negative experiences was my fear of not pleasing some guy and oh-so-wrongly believing that my feelings/desires/boundaries were unworthy of consideration. One or two guys were actually forceful/shitheads but the others were not--they just weren't observant or sensitive enough to read my non-verbal cues and at the end of the day that's on me. A word to the wise--teach your children to respect themselves and others and empower them to feel true ownership of their own bodies. For the LW, you're entitled to feel icky about what happened but from what you've described, asking for an apology is truly out of bounds (assuming it was a make out session gone awry and not a forceful situation). Do not contact this boy from your past--leave him there where he belongs. Focus on yourself and realize that closure can only come from within. Best of luck.
I contacted my ex for "closure" 15 years later. Turns out she's every bit as crazy as I thought. And that, my friends, was all the closure I needed. :o)
Thanks for your comments and sharing your experiences. I think it's critical for women like LW and those who champion her in the comments to be reminded that there is a male perspective to consider as well, one that doesn't deserve to be regarded with such hostility.

I dated very Catholic high school girls far too many winters ago, and WSN sounds like she had the same frame that they did...

That's a seriously problematic dynamic - "I want you to fuck me, but not if I have to consent to it." As it turns out, my first girlfriend described in @30 was very catholic, and apparently an exception, because she was every bit as horny as I was and not at all ashamed of it, at least with me.

FWIW, I could have come in my pants that night, but I managed to put on the brakes. If I did, she simply would have been fascinated, like me, to learn that was even possible. (I might also point out that it's quite possible for a woman to come from dry humping as well.)
Letter Writer seems to be hung up on the idea that she never would have given permission. On the other hand, she clearly wasn't all that alarmed by the rubbing against her while it was happening. So let's throw the idea of explicit permission into the mix and see what happens:

They are kissing, him on top. He asks, "May I please rub my pelvis against you?" She doesn't mind this, as per the actual situation, so she says "Yes, you may." About thirty seconds later he says, "God I think I'm going to come." and she says "No way! You didn't ask permission to cream your jeans! I forbid it!"

Yeah, sure, that's totally how it should have gone down.

There are those who will say no, the question he should have asked was "Can we dry-hump?" but I'm not convinced Mr. 14-Year-Old knew that was what he was doing. Again, his motions were apparently subtle enough to not raise an eyebrow on her part while they were occurring. Whether it's a dog going at your leg or a person on top of you, there's no mistaking the motions or the intention when you are actually being humped. I'm guessing he just got excited and started wriggling -- a perfectly normal response to arousal -- which put him over the edge. For the umpteenth time this is utterly unsurprising coming from a 14 year old trying to cope with the usual case of adolescent hormone rush, plus inexperience using the equipment.

In any case, Letter Writer, you get to control how far the action goes. You do NOT get to control how aroused the other person gets as a result of the actions you have permitted. To say "I would never have said yes if I had known you were going to orgasm is ridiculous and controlling. Reverse the genders and see how stupid and assholish it would sound coming out of a man. "Madeleine, I would never have consented to letting you climb on top of me and grind through our clothing if I had known you were going to have an orgasm as a result! I want you to apologize to me for orgasming immediately!"

Let alone carrying around grief over it for seven fucking years.
Bodies moving together while kissing as kids is mutual - becoming aroused and excited is part of the equation.
To victimize him for being her partner in this dance is radically abusive and shaming of his sexuality.

To peripherally toss out that he groped her breast adds innuendo that moves feelings but does not inform the situation but to infer he may be a groper - he's a kid with a girlfriend and they are learning about boundaries together -

To put the burden on him and claim yourself a victim is a disservice to yourself and everyone else.

There are many socialized turd butt aggressive grabby manipulative guys looking to score who bully and shame girls - lets not in thinking of them toss this guy in - nothing said here necessitates him being any more than a partner in a 14 year olds relationship - trying to work out his body, his feelings and do so with a partner who communication is suspect at best.
So two 14 year olds decide to go to first base. While on first base, he briefly makes an attempt for second base but actually doesn't get half way before returning to first base. Back on first base, the excitement in his pants is too much and mother nature takes over - he starts to grind because well, hell, he could be so excited that that the blood pressure actually hurts so he needs relief, conscious or otherwise. He dry humps for a bit, probably not even aware that he is grinding and before he knows it, creams in his pants, beyond his control and much to his embarrassment, excuses himself, and goes to clean up the mess in his pants. And she feels violated? Assuming they were both virgins and going to first base the very first time, are we not to expect that the motions of the two would be awkward at best? Her description of what happened seems tame to me. She's saying he should have done this, that and that other thing without her having to respond in kind. Can we just say that at 14, the ability to ask questions in the middle of a sexual experience is a high bar to meet?
"I would love to read his take on those of "my best pals" who see predatory male privilege and rape or quasi-rape in every male-female encounter.
Well, I don't hang with your best pals, but I know that type of political personality. It has less to do with gender and more to do with fixing the rules in a way which interpretation defaults over to the group favoured by the rulemakers, and any resultant sanction thus falls onto the Other, especially in cases of ambiguity. Lawyers often draft clauses which state, in effect, "in case of uncertainty in A, B, or C, X shall govern". The best popular example is the informal baseball rule "tie goes to the runner", where one can be called safe when one was, objectively, out. Enforcement can play a role, too, as one can have neutral language in the requirements but selective or biased application of those rules.

In cases of disputed sexual encounters it often takes the form of having the perception of the complainant asserted be the determinative factor, (i.e. "I felt X happened" is treated as equivalent to "X happened", which one sees in the comments above which validate the letter-writer's feelings of violation). Campus conduct codes are often used this way, sometimes to the chagrin of the people who most believe in them:…

"I want you to fuck me, but not if I have to consent to it." That's a rather tidy and accurate way of expressing it. Consent implies agency and co-ownership of decisions; silence is plausible deniability and a clear conscience.
@shurenka: What could be deeply traumatic to one person might not be such a big deal to another. Violation is violation.

So the standard of violation is to be determined, variably and autocratically, by each individual woman, without regard for what actually transpired, what was communicated, the context, or the man's intentions? Wow.

My advice to my son, once he get's a little older, will to be stay far far away from delicate flowers like LW. She may be pretty, but make no mistake, she is poisonous, the moral equivalent of the douchebags I'll advice my daughter to stay away from.
Okay, I didn't make it through all the comments, but the thing that occurred to me with LW1 were two possibilities:

(1) She has a very sex-negative view of sex which has left her with these completely skewed perceptions. I'm not minimizing her traumatization, but she needs to understand that feeling traumatized for what she's described is not normal nor healthy. It's like being traumatized for drinking water or eating cereal -- totally normal behavior that shouldn't induce trauma, even by the most liberal reading of her letter. She NEEDS to see a counselor to help her unwind this because her compass is WAAAAY off.

(2) I haven't seen this in any of the other comments (though I only read half), I'm wondering if she was raped or otherwise sexually assaulted or molested and that's why she's having this extreme reaction -- both to the incident itself and her holding onto it for 7 years later! I can totally see her totally blocking out such a trauma and displacing it on other things -- projecting it on to this terribly innocent incident. The trauma of violation may be valid, just not originating from this source.
Pretty much everything I can think of to say has already been said--and then some.
But this part really bothers me: "I don't want to report him to the police because it's not necessary—it happened so long ago." So she seems to believe that if she wanted to report this to the police, it's a reportable offense. The only thing keeping her from doing that is that the trauma "happened so long ago."

But in the next sentence she says "As far as I'm concerned, it wasn't rape." First of all, one sentence earlier, she said that the reason she is going to report him now--seven years after he came in his own pants against her clothed body during a makeout session--that it happened so long ago. Now, she's implying that she knows it isn't rape, though she seems to be under the impression that you can decide whether or not you were raped based on . . . what? Not penetration, apparently. You may get to decide whether or not you feel your boundaries were ignored, you may get to decide whether or not you feel violated, you may get to decide HOW YOU FEEL as the result of an interaction no matter what, but you don't get to decide that just because you are uncomfortable with a sexual experience it can be defined as rape and is worthy of being reported to the police.

BTW, all this discussion that's parsing "making out" and "dry humping" has left me confused. What is making out if it doesn't include a little dry humping? When two people are making out, is it supposed to be strictly mouth-to-mouth contact? Maybe I was/am just too much of a slutty girl, but I would have considered that whole encounter to fall under the category of "making out."
Is WSN actually 21yrs old? this would be a compleatly normal problem for a 14 yr old girl to wright to Dan about and given the popularity of his advise column and his internet presence it's not even all that unlikely ? i have a hard time imagining that someone intelligent enough to compose a letter AND who also happens to be over the age of 21 would have written this but my name isn't Mystic Meg
@nocutename: What is making out if it doesn't include a little dry humping?

Making out is two people side by side intensely kissing and (optionally) feeling each other up. When I was a kid, it used to happen a lot in the back rows of movie theaters.

Dry humping, when done properly, involves one party on top of the other (man or woman can be on top), full clothed, grinding in such a way that his hard-on rubs against her clit. When you get older, it's called a "lap dance".
@179: * Second paragraph should read "is *not* going to report him now," not "is going to report him now." Aaarrgghh!

Also, what I meant to make clear and don't think I did, is the fact that she thinks she has experienced something that she could report to the police is either indicative that this letter has been edited or that she's seriously over-reacting and has lost touch with reality. She can be upset all she wants--no one can legislate that. Whether or not others agree with her 14-year-old self's reaction is irrelevant. She has a right to her feelings. But unless something more happened than the letter describes, that sense of violation and perhaps shame should have receded long ago. Perhaps she would always have an "icky" memory of that makeout session. However, to be traumatized this badly 7 years later hints at emotional/psychological issues best dealt with through therapy; to think that she has a legitimate legal complaint that could result in his arrest suggests someone really out of touch with reality.
@seandr: You've basically described all my makeout sessions as a young'un.

Lap dances? I guess I should have charged for them.
@180. Effing hell, that makes sense.
@nocutename: Not too late - $20 plus tip for the duration of a 3 and a half minute song. All you need is a smelly couch, a really horrible DJ, and a floor manager to periodically check on you to make sure you keep your top on.
Yeah, I think now that I'm middle aged with a roll or two, stretch marks, and cellulite, my days as a lucrative lap dancer are over.
@nocutename: It's 45% attitude, 45% movement, and 10% looks.
@seandr: oh. Okay, then. I'm in like Flynn.
The body might be worse than it was when I was 17, but the moves are better, and the confidence is higher, too. Confidence about ability both to excite, to help complete, and to know what excites and gets me to completion. Less so about the physical aesthetic of the body. Guess it's time to break out the old piggy bank.
There is nothing misogynist about pointing out that WSN has a warped sense of proportion. She's carried this around for seven years? She actually thought it important to mention that she considered going to the police but decided against it? What's next, breaking into his house and boiling a bunny? IF an apology was ever warranted -- and I suspect that it was not -- the time to ask for it expired long ago. Get some help, girl.
I have better advice than Dan for PUNT. Rent the movie Stage Beauty and watch it. If wife jumps his bones afterwards, bring up crossdressing. Much more female-friendly than a drag show, and if she's at all open to CD's, she will respond to the movie.
I felt for the LW a bit. Yeah, we all have 'shudder' moments from early fumblings, people we shouldn't have been with, doing things we regretted later.

He got a boner and came in his pants during a make out session. She didn't quite understand it, got scared and grossed out.

If she was still 14 she'd deserve a hug, warm cup of cocoa, and a belated talk about the birds and the bees.

Instead she allowed it to eat away at her for seven years and has grown into this irrational person who is considering stalking him online, demanding apologies, making thinly-veiled threats to call the police.

So this makes me wonder if she's ever gotten a wet and tingly feeling in her panties while making out without asking for permission? If so, doesn't she need to apologize and register as a sex offender? Or is it only the male sexual response she finds disgusting and criminal?
The rubbing with her 14 year old boyfriend was consensual. It's too bad this experience left such a lasting and disturbing impression. I'd really encourage WSN to enter into some therapy to help her clarify what exactly the she is most upset about.
I remember when my girlfriend and I were teenagers "making out" fully clothed. She pulled my groin against hers and rubbed herself against my hard-on until I came. She was very excited and pleased to have made me cum, and I was equally pleased. No problem at all, just loving pleasure.
@18: cunty? really?
er, I mean @17. That's what I get for trying to act superior. But seriously, I'm getting tired of cunt. Especially in a place where lots of readers would take serious offense at other kinds epithets.
@nocutename: Love it!

The young ones are a complete waste of time. They have no idea what they have, they haven't come to terms with male sexuality, and worst of all they make you listen to top 40 music.
Seandr said it, but I'm repeating it, because I think it is really, really true. Barring a minority of exceptions, most young girls/women "haven't come to terms with male sexuality." This doesn't just apply to this lw's story, this is true. And pop culture, Hollywood, and romance novels like Twilight, etc. do not prepare them for it, but probably make the first few encounters with genuine male sexuality more difficult and confusing, because it clashes with what young women have been led to expect. It's telling that Tracy Clark-Flory, who just wrote about "porn" on Tumblr, said that the "second most popular “porn”Tumblr in the world features multiple GIFs from 'The Notebook.'"
@nocutename: Hadn't really thought of the reasons why, but now that you mention it, I think it goes all the way back to Disney and the cardboard cut-out men depicted in those god damn princess movies.

Just once I'd like to see Prince Charming tell Cinderella "No, I don't want to go on a fucking picnic, I want you to strip down to a pair of thigh-high stockings and crawl around the floor for me."
@seandr: I think the movie might lose its "G" rating then . . .

How about first she crawls around in a pair of thigh-high stockings and then they go on a picnic? Would that at least make it qualify for "PG-13?"
I have been thinking about why the LW asks this question now, and not earlier. Was she really so traumatised by it at 14? Or did something else trigger these feelings now?

My reason for asking this is that I remember when I was around 20 and worked with handicapped children for a year. We had a one week training session about human sexuality for care givers- ranging from people who worked with babies to people who worked with the elderly. It was quite intense, and the topic of sexual abuse came up several times.

And suddenly I began asking myself if my father had abused me. The only thing I remembered was that I regularly slept in my parents' bed, my mother working the night shift, and that one morning I woke up and felt my father's penis against my back (we were spooning, he was asleep and now I guess he had an erection).
The question if other things had happened and I had just forgotten them, drove me quite crazy at that time, and I was asking myself if all my issues with having trouble to letting myself fall in love were due to some forgotten sexual abuse. (Yes, I was quite narcissistic at 20.)

I am glad I didn't discuss these feelings/ doubts with my father. And a few months later, I came to the conclusion that I was a bit highstrung because there was nothing that indicated abuse at all.

Anyway, what if the LW is just confused by her love life and sexuality and re-interprets things of the past to help explain to herself why things don't go now as she thinks they should be going?
@200 (migrationist): That is a very interesting line of thought. Several people have suggested that she suffered sexual abuse and is projecting real abuse onto this fairly benign situation, but I wonder if your theory might be closer. She says she feels panicked if she's having sex when someone is on top of her, and maybe she's trying to find a "reason" for that feeling. Maybe it's a variant of claustrophobia.
Ms Cute/Dr Sean - You two might be able to take that alliance to Survivor (if that is still going and still having seasons for which it takes newcomers; the last three or four times I have seen advertisements, none of them recent, it has appeared that they keep recycling proven "ratings cows"). But you both are verging on something Ms Helenka and I noticed earlier.

[I wanted to explore my sexuality a little...]

Then, if we take that sentence as maybe more exactly true than WSN thought she intended, she should not have involved another person (perhaps especially not a male person of her own age and potential inexperience) in her exploration. You two say she hadn't come to terms with [her BF's] sexuality; I'll frame it that she wasn't interested in his sexuality.

I had an alternate read of the letter that she basically was using him, possibly because the quoted bit sounds like the sort of thing someone might say when acquiring or trying out a vibrator or some other tool dedicated to self-pleasure. What she was never able to stand about the experience which became trauma in the end was that he used her "better". It felt a bit too harsh at the time (as I told Ms Hopkins early in the thread, I was making an effort to be kind), but the anti-LW comments seem to have taken on a bit of breadth as the thread has progressed.
@Mr. Ven: I was thinking something sort of similar, but my take, given what I know of 14-year-old girls (usual disclaimers follow; your mileage may vary), is that what she wanted from her boyfriend during that make-out session wasn't sexual but romantic. It's the "Notebook" version of sex: filled with Deep Meaning, longing stares into each others' eyes/souls, passion for love and romance, as opposed to passion for sex. I think when she says she "wanted to explore [her] sexuality a little," she's either applying a much later-acquired phrase and its attendant connotation, or she means that what she wanted to "explore" was her sense of being romantically desirable. She was using the makeout session with the boyfriend for the validation it provided, but she might not have been getting anything sexual out of it for herself, and the idea that he would cheapen it and make it into a crasser activity and get something out of it other that what she's sanctioned which was LOVE, is what really upset her. We've been using the word "violated" here on the thread, but the lw used the word "exploited." She felt then that he exploited her expression of Romance so that he could have something sexual.

Understandable, as a 14-year-old girl raised on pop culture Rom/Coms, etc., but getting weird as the obsession of a 21-year-old woman.
@202 (Mr. Ven):
... she should not have involved another person (perhaps especially not a male person of her own age and potential inexperience) in her exploration. ... I'll frame it that she wasn't interested in his sexuality.

There are random weeks when participating in this advice column is a refreshing delight - seeing armchair voyeurs (and voyeuses) try their best to unravel the tangled mess.

I think you've come the closest so far. Even if she were interested in his sexuality, she's not supposed to be. She's barely supposed to be interested in her own, especially if she grew up in a puritanical environment (that I fear is prevalent across much of the U.S.).

I have been reluctant to reveal any of my history here, but will admit I'd been exploring my own sexuality for years On. My. Own before I ever saw or touched an uncovered penis. So, why couldn't the LW do the same? Because the culture expects her to be pure and not to touch herself (and not to think about it either). Only an opposite sex partner is allowed that privilege. And feel awed that she's permitting him to worship her body.

That's one of the trademarks of abstinence-only sex (non) ed. The script tells her that her partner will know exactly what to do and that it'll be magical. The script omits to mention that partners aren't mind readers. And sex and body parts are icky and weird. Which one can thoroughly enjoy AND overlook when one is fully engaged in the experience and not merely lying back placidly waiting for it to be done to them.

Which is what I fear she's still doing. If she doesn't want a man lying on top of her (I guess that rules out Missionary), then she'd be upfront and simply say, "I don't like that position, so let's explore other ones. Here's this really great site ... yadda, yadda."
@nocutename: EXCELLENT perspective! I want to remember this for a conversation with my 15 year old daughter...
I have no compassion for WSN nor her tender little feelings because I find the entire concept of being traumatized by a consensual make-out session ridiculous This is a hard old world, honey. My advice would be to toughen up. If dry humping and a random boob grab is the worst thing that's happened to you by the age of 21, you're leading a charmed and sheltered life. Unwanted sexual contact is never appropriate, but neither is internalizing and brooding upon a young teen incident that - worse case scenario - could be classified as a sexual faux pas.
201-nocute-- Yes, and let's take it a step further. We're so used to looking for cause and effect that we first discard he-came-when-we-were-dry-humping as the excuse for her panicked love making now. Then we conclude that it might be some early sex abuse that did it. I suggested in 54 that she might simply not like him-on-top positions for no reason at all. It's just something that doesn't feel good to her. Why do we need to find reasons for everything? Why, if there is a cause, can't it be some event, some bad dream or fairy tale monster that she randomly associated with being under something? I don't like eggplant, but I'm not looking for some traumatic experience in my long past that may have caused my avoidance of baba ganoush. Why can't she say now "honey, let's roll over" confident that her preference is all the excuse she needs without having to provide a subconsciously manufactured panic attack to justify?
Even if she were interested in his sexuality, she's not supposed to be.
This calls to mind what feminist writer Amanda Marcotte calls this "gatekeeping the pussy", where a woman is barred from exploring her own sexuality, or connecting with their partner's, where that sexuality isn't in service of some other, nonsexual, purpose.

Where Marcotte falls down (as does Helenka), though, is that she ascribes it solely to a social conservative perspective. Over the years I was in school and then in divorce practice I noticed that a lot of feminist women did it too, but were in a different kind of denial about it. There really is no difference, imho, in a woman cutting herself off from her own lust (or understanding and enjoying his) because....
... your church says you're bad if you enjoy it; or
... because it doesn't fit what is deemed to be ideologically appropriate sexuality; or
... you have been trained in some fashion (whether misandrist or misogynist, or religious or secular/ideological in origin) to treat male sexuality as essentially predatory and victimizing; or
... because you have been trained by the therapy culture to Process the everloving shit out of even the tiniest problem and no sexytimes happen until whatever Issue X may be is resolved to therapyspeak perfection.
@ 208

But would a 14 year-old (or even at 21) have acquired enough knowledge of the therapy culture to have assimilated it to such a subconscious level? The LW IMO doesn't seem to fit that particular mold.
@209: It depends on the fourteen year old. I've met kids way younger who are well integrated into that because their parent(s) uses it for problem-solving, or because many schools (and Boards) and parents pack kids into counselling with astonishing rapidity. There is a certain kind of mind which frets unless something is being processed forever instead of solved or addressed in behaviour, and they are producing a large generation of kids.
@209/210 - I have always "overthought" my experiences, as far back as memory goes. I agree with seeker that "There is a certain kind of mind which frets unless something is being processed," and I grant that it makes me unappealing as a dating partner for many people, but it is a part of my life I enjoy and for which I no longer apologize.

    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

    Add a comment

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.