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.
HA. Cheerfully and scathingly hilarious...as always.
Play me out, Carl.
FetLife group for foot fetishists and their significant others:
That last one is critical of Dan's earlier foot fetish advice, but it offers tips on sensual facial foot massages, and on stretching beforehand to avoid leg cramps.
Though I can't help but eye-roll at CULL. It pains me how obviously he wanted it to be a red flag...
I got your message at @336 on the last thread. You are an angel and I too think you rock.
Mon acajou, @12, and now we know!
Also, if I had the stage presence for drag, my nom de drag would be Sugar Beats.
And knowing is half the battle, mon chapeau rose! BTW, my favorite nom de drag is a theoretical one- playwright Tony Kushner wrote a play (Homebody/Kabul) focusing on Afghanistan just before 9/11 (it opened a few months afterward) and virtually every critic who reviewed called it "eerily prescient". Kushner's boyfriend then suggested he take it as his drag handle- Eara Lee Prescient.
Milkshake seems to assume that NSA sex is strictly favored by men. Which means he has definitely NOT met some of my friends.
Nice to see you back Ophian. Whaddya mean you don't have stage presence?
Anyone else experience cognitive dissonance while reading about an overly critical TOES, who then gushes about her boyfriend's beautiful sexuality?
Still Thinking, @24, Hiya.
The English are more reasonable about all this, and feel that the few days a year that they have to take extra care for their pet, is worth it. There is a product from an English company, BacToNature called Bitch Spray, which has no odor at all. You spray that on her parts and it takes away the smell that attracts male dogs.
I agree the "shelters" full of unwanted dogs is a very sad thing. But to think all dogs need their sexuality to be taken away is just wrong. After all, females only come in heat 2 or 3 times a year for a few days. It's not like people, who are sexual all the time.
No matter what you do, pet dogs *either* have their sexuality taken away from them *or* they fill up the shelters. There’s no way around it. It’s cruel to leave an animal with all its sexual desires intact and then forbid them to act on them. Maybe it’s less of an issue for bitches but it’s every single day for male dogs.
Your female dog has about a 1/5 to 1/4 chance of getting pyometra in her lifetime, a very painful and dangerous condition. Congratulations.
You might feel that you and your dog are happiest if she is unspayed and watched carefully for signs of infection two or three times a year, and that’s fine. But caring for animals in conditions that are created by humans is always going to be a compromise. Not everyone is capable of the same compromises. I live in a dense urban neighbourhood, so my dogs are spayed/neutered, they are vaccinated against everything my vet recommends, and they are less than 35 lbs. If I lived way out in the country I might consider drowning puppies, vaccinating against rabies only and keeping large german shepherds, but I don’t.
There is no need for you to be smug about being the best dog owner ever and to plead with all us unenlightened folks to be like you.
2) Interesting that Mr Savage doesn't distinguish between cutting off sex and cutting off conversation. I'm not sure whether to be more surprised that Mr Savage ignores that there was no cutter-cuttee conversation or that he expects cheerful acquiescence in the cutting. Result merchant, perhaps? thinking saying okay is the safest road to becoming friends again? Seriously, though, is she worth rebefriending if she gets The Ultimatum and just goes along with it happily, simply informing FWB of the cutoff? Or, in FWB culture, which is not my strong suit, is this the equivalent of friends accepting that plans will be broken last minute if A Date is in the offing?
Mr Rhone - If one goes by the maxim that the only way to be sure of someone's attitude towards NSA sex is to be having it with hem, it makes your remark a good deal more interesting.
4) Anyone at all familiar with the internet who can't find information to support a partner with that particular barely-a-kink isn't... giving the reading audience that inaccurate a picture of the delights of MM in an MF/FF world.
6) Talk about one bad sentence absolutely being a brilliant case of Open Mouth, Insert Foot (which clearly belongs in another letter). If only LW had been able to hold that one little wonder in, she'd have had nearly universal sympathy. But she makes me think they're almost equally unpleasant (it's the insistence of harping on the label over the behaviour that sends up the pink flag), and it's tempting to want the two of them to remain chained together in an unbreakable bond for all eternity. It would serve her right if her next girlfriend insists on an MFF threesome while identifying as a solid L.
1) I can't help but wonder, if both requests are granted, what the lesser asker will get by way of compensation.
3) Madame has stumped this portion of the panel.
5) After seeing so many letters misaddressed to Mr Savage or the Prudecutor, it is a great relief finally to see a letter addressed to the appropriate adviser. I'm not sufficiently pleased with the question to spend time considering an answer, but I give the LW credit for asking someone clearly so well suited to devising appropriate revenge on a sibling.
@39 sorry to keep screwing up.
Mr. Ven @39: Is that a maxim? Regardless, my remark is not THAT interesting; I just have the kind of "good listener" personality that turns friends/acquaintances into oversharing confession junkies. It's a blessing and a curse.
What's with the random numerical order? And my section wasn't numbered at all! This is madness, I say, MADNESS!!
@43: Sound reasoning, sissoucat : )
Pretending to be a dog for the sake of sexual gratification is sick and wrong for reasons that should be obvious to all but the most crude and degenerated minds.
Burn the dog costume, and get yourself a sexy kitty cat outfit like a normal, decent person.
Also, if she’s spayed before her first heat she will not put any puppies into a shelter. The longer spaying is delayed the higher the risk of a slip-up.
@49 Mrraaawww !
Dan's right: DTFHA (Dump The Fucking Ho' Already, who's Down To Fuck, Ha!)
As for the submissive puppy with a crush on Dan & Terry: as long as submissive never means passive in participation... ;-)~+~+
As someone long acquainted with harsh recollections recycled endlessly to the detriment of my mental health by my "nearest and dearest", I greatly empathize. You write of a new wife, perhaps things are going well for you (and not well for bro/too well for you for bro's taste)? You also write of attaining 50, in which case I should ask: aren't there any number of embarrassments and failures you've experienced that you (should) have shared with your spouse, in the laughing "did I tell you..." mode?
In the endless gladiatorial bouts sometimes known as "family time", the thing to remember is that verbal barbs only hurt as much as you let them. Simply responding (in the example of one of Bill Cosby's characters) "So?" is an amazingly effective defense. You're 50, if you have kids you've worn (most) every human biological fluid possible, who gives a shit if you were wearing a shirt that buttoned the wrong way when it happened? If you're capable, just make a weird face, along with everyone else, and say something to the effect of "What's with that???". Maybe the worst that could happen is you'll need to cuddle your wife more in front of your nephew (to prove your studlyness), at best maybe your wife says "show me".
There is a maxim about only the participants in a marriage being able truly to pronounce on its quality; think of all the people in what everyone calls wonderful and exemplary marriages who are quite miserable - and those the other way about as well. Why not then extend the maxim to being able to have a genuine understanding of someone's true views of NSA sex by being the/an other participant in the NSAS mentioned? It also makes it seem like a cross with the
bit in Sex, Lies and Videotape about not taking advice from people with whom one isn't intimate. And I was able to give Mr Ophian something interesting to imagine, which made it all good.
The order was not random. I started with Mr Barker (and I was genuinely astonished that Ms Maddow was too starstruck to be at all familiar with the various indignities suffered by numerous TPIR fondlers of refrigerators), and then just went up by two each time. I didn't feel like dignifying any of the LWs with the acronym provided.
In Europe and South America they also have places where you can take your dog to get it laid, as constant sexual frustration, as we all know, is a hellish way to live.
Maxims aside, I thought I'd just take my friends' word for it. It has worked out fine so far.
Fair enough not using the stated acronyms, but it was a bit confusing.
While I appreciate the assist, I'll be able to provide interesting things for Mr. Ophian to contemplate for quite some time to come. I'm resourceful like that : )
I still get a queasy feeling every time I hear that phrase...
@59 Married in MA: I wish you could have a heart-to-heart talk with my older sibs. I'm turning 50 next year, too---geez!
Why do I keep seeing humiliatingly horrific visions of a pony and a clown waiting for me at Chuck E Cheese all because my oldest sister still fondly remembers holding me all the way home from the hospital?
Methinks it's time to plan a good long trip around my next birthday-time.
I should have added that yours is only hearsay evidence. I don't distrust your interpretation or disagree with anything you've postulated - and much of the posts of many of us amount to the same. But it gave me the amusing idea that perhaps your evidence is better and your experience has been a bit more varied than you've admitted, and I dropped a subtle hint to that effect, thinking, among other things, that Mr O might appreciate the point.
(I could respond to your postscript, but it's giving me a little case of the creeps, which I shall pay you the compliment of presuming to be unintended.)
I watched the doc do mine, it is out patient and a piece of cake. You just take a few days off on the couch in front of the TV. (Hell, I'd started clearing the pipes out the same afternoon.)
I translate so poorly into Human that, whenever I think of anything that might amuse anyone here, I feel almost honour bound to mention it. Besides, it lightens my tone.
(Mr Rhone - I think he left before your time. Or were you lurking then? Anyway, I hope he is happily enjoying his study of Latvian, wherever he may be, and toning down his impulse to use the F word.)
She also sounds like the type that doesn't like hearing about exes. She wants to know her partner likes sexually but doesn't like to hear that her partner enjoyed riding the baloney pony with the cute barista at the cafe near her apartment after college.
Basically, a complete fucking hypocrite.
@80: I'm not familiar with Mr. Ank, no.
I enjoyed the discussion on responsible pet ownership & it reminded me to renew our pet licenses. I doubt there's much enforcement but I'm happy to support the Seattle Animal Shelter anyway.
Or you can act like a decent person, own up to your disinterest (and borderline contempt), and end it.
Being a lesbian is far too politicized. And that needs to stop.
Don't worry, the second phrase is implicit in the first. If her new relationship doesn't work out, you will get more points for not being contemptuous of it in its infancy.
In the meantime, if she is inclined to obey his embargo, that says something about how seriously she takes you. You two could have taken things to the next level, but for some reason you two didn't, and she chose to go there with someone else. Don't go chasing trouble where it isn't worth chasing.(Absent all the other things that do qualify as red flags, that is. Personally, I wouldn't blame the guy too much for being insecure about someone his new girlfriend was fucking on a regular basis.)
Okay--I'm putting it on my bucket list of travel-do's. Thanks!
@87 fi restless: That works for me, too, in regards to my disrespectful sibs, their spouses, two adult nephews and a niece out of my beloved parents' five grown grandchildren, and some of my remaining older relatives.
I agree, and am already doing just that.
I'm living to be happy, not "obligated".
Mr Ank (short for Ankylosaur) was a prolific comment poster for some time. He was a Brazilian whose greatest passion was linguistics, living in the Netherlands with a Russian wife who forbade him to study Latvian. One too many threads in which he was alone on a limb arguing relentlessly, often against large numbers, burned him out. I once ventured that he would rather be right than kind, an assessment he thought to have some accuracy.
I was just agreeing with your comment to BARK and expressed preference of a sleek catsuit over a bulky dog costume.
As you and everyone well know---I'm decent. I'm not quite sure about normal, though.
Hey, Dan---do you, Terry and DJ still have Stinker?
I can imagine being a little scared, but in a good way.
@lolorhone : thanks for #58 :-) English is tricky...
@auntiegrizelda & seandr : are you familiar with Chi's Sweet Home ?
1) The first rule of NSA-lovin' girlfriends is you do not talk about NSA-lovin' girlfriends...
2) What began as a discussion on the prudence of a MMF threesome between a LW, her husband, and her gay best friend somehow morphed into Ophian and I becoming her practice partners, with the role of photographer auctioned off to benefit the It Gets Better Project- which now that I think about it would have made us charitable porn stars. I believe the whole thing was Mr. Ven's suggestion (it was a Bi-Centric July post- ask him for details) but the proposal is still occasionally floated by those who were on that thread. Nothing concrete, however. Besides, actually flirting with Ophian trumps any hypothetical MMF tryst.
My original Bicentric July post was that, unless the LW was committing the cardinal sin of rounding, the threesome ought not to take place because the DDGGF was not sufficiently polite to claim to be at least bi-curious. That was in some way a tribute to Ms Erica's very hard line that every participant in every sexual activity should present as being enthusiastic about whatever is being done being what (s)he absolutely wants to do solely for selfish purposes, as in, even if Partner V is indulging Partner W in Act Z, V should be presenting as personally panting for Z and not as Doing This for You, even with the most generous spirit.
My serious reply was to be irked that the LW just assumed that, because DDGGF was attracted to her husband, he'd automatically be up for an MFM. Mr Rhone thought, without the support of any evidence, that she'd already at least given serious consideration to DDGGF's response. We then established that we know a good many of the same sort of man, only the men he knows present as gay while the ones I know present as bi. All the better, in a way.
After a bit more flirting between Messrs Rhone and Ophian, I added a [BJ] post to the effect that the LW needed to rehearse an MMF or an MFM before actually attempting one, clearly the only thing to be done was for her to practise with Messrs O and R before attempting the same with her husband and DDGGF. The idea met with the approval of the participants involved, and the further details of the charitable benefit emerged in part because Mr Savage, who advised the LW to pursue the threesome, made his standard request to send pictures.
One thing I didn't mention in the previous thread was that the way the LW referred to her DDGGF in exactly that terminology struck me as a bit disrespectful, similar to the way that opposite-sexer men ogle lesbians. I think it was her leading with DDG rather than mentioning that detail later; it seemed to centre her desire for the GF above the friend's attraction to the husband or the husband's being GGG.
English is tricky...
Such a formal and old-fashioned language. Americans in particular seem to struggle with it. :-)
As I wrote the last time you made that assertion,
>> I encourage people to try to find something to enjoy in any adventure, [but] that doesn't mean people who hate X have to endure X, let alone try to enjoy it. ... Ideally, A gets some pleasure from the happy memories A now associates with B's favorite kinks, and vice versa. If B's kink disturbs or upsets A, that happy state will be harder to attain, and the couple may be less compatible. >>
Your version makes me sound like a raving lunatic. Could you stop, please?