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.
Guys---there you go. This should take care of any penis size insecurities. Be thankful for whatever shape and size you've got (Alison's right--we don't all crave "Lou Ferrigno as The Incredible Hulk" sized cocks). Variety rocks!
Okay---time for Griz to call it a night.
He either is a good fit or he isn't. Torturing the poor bastard serves no purpose
Sorry wrong. My assumptions are evidence based, that ANGST has an age preference and that his partner may be sensitive to it. In the first sentence:
I'm a 37-year-old straight male in a relationship with a slightly older woman
He found "slightly older" a remarkable detail to include, while his description of his problem was remarkably vague, "she wants things I don't want, she made a fuss... please tell me she isn't right to leave"
I would expect either "we're around 40" or "I'm 37, she's 41" from a man who was completely comfortable being younger.
I request the benefit of the doubt in the future - Please ask me about my reasoning before assuming it's based on stereotypes or hearsay.
I don't think I'd like to write more about ANGST, I'm tempted to demonize him as she's being demonized in this thread. The gender wars get so boring.
Without the assistance of surgery, women can't alter the size of their breasts, and breast forms or other external fakes like heavily padded bras reveal the truth when the clothes come off. Women are often insecure about the size, shape, irregularity, sagginess, etc. of their breasts, and even though they are frequently assured that their partner likes them as they are, or that some men or women prefer smaller breasts (it's almost always breasts that are deemed "too small" that women worry won't be attractive enough), it's a cultural script that says a woman has luscious breasts: big, but not too big, firm and high with a slight bounce to them. We've all heard stories of women whose husbands or boyfriends have pressured them to get breast augmentation surgery; we've all heard stories of women who've been rejected by lovers post-mastectomy. If you are a woman whose breasts don't conform to the idealized "norm," you may well feel insecure, and if your boyfriend or girlfriend appears to prefer the female form that has breasts significantly different from your own, it is understandable that you'd be self-conscious. If you already felt self-conscious about your breast size and shape and you and your partner had a sexual experience in which the other woman's breasts, which were about the same size and shape as your own were explicitly deemed a turn-off by your partner, a reason why the sexual experience was a disappointment, you'd be even more insecure about something you could at least fake with clothes on or supplement surgically, and which don't really contribute materially to sexual satisfaction beyond aesthetic preference.
Penises are tied to the concept of "manhood" like no other body part. They are associated with virility, with masculinity. Their size is (often unrealistically) correlated with the ability to sexually satisfy a partner. Unlike breasts, they cannot be altered: if you think your penis is too small or if your partner thinks your penis is too small, you can't surgically change it even if you want to. The prevalence of penis-enhancing or -stretching creams, medicines, machines, dating from antiquity and across all cultures is a testament to the anxiety men may carry about (ahem) "measuring up." The equation of penis size with being a "real" man is so persistent that it is felt in nervous jokes (think "shrinkage" on Seinfeld) and insults that cross cultures.
Unlike breasts (unless we're talking absolutely cartoonishly over-amped via implants), the size or girth of a penis really does affect the sex two people can have. Penis size may limit possible positions, it can mean that cervical stimulation or g-spot stimulation may or may not be achieved (depending on the woman, it may be a good or bad thing if, say, cervical stimulation can't occur). I don't know if there is a minimal length necessary for prostrate stimulation in men, but since some gay men are size queens, I assume it's not just for the aesthetics. Unlike breasts, penis size can't really be altered, even by the man most desperate to please his clearly unsatisfied partner.
And unlike breasts, or asses, or virtually anything else, in virtually all circumstances and ordinary clothing, it is very difficult to have any sense of how big, in terms of length or girth, a man's penis might be until he gets naked. This puts him in a very vulnerable position.
Every time a man gets naked with a partner for the first time, he knows his penis is being evaluated in a way other body parts aren't. Much depends on it. Not much can be done about it. Much has been mythologized. Much has been ridiculed. Many a man's self-worth has been bolstered or shaken by what he thinks is the norm and how he thinks he compares to it and, above all, how partners react or have reacted to it.
Perhaps men shouldn't be so sensitive to this issue and many aren't. As many (I among them) will attest, there's such a thing as having too big a dick, and a dick of any size that has no skills is just a pretty but useless appendage, good for arousing interest but ultimately disappointing. Some people prefer smaller penises, and it's not uncommon for men with smaller penises to learn compensatory skills while the really big-dicked may (and often seem to) rely on that attribute alone to be enough to satisfy a partner.
But the fact is penis size is one of the most fraught of issues for many, many men. Some men have insecurities dating from middle school locker room comparisons or that stem from having a father who seemed or was more greatly endowed. Some men have experiences of being shamed by other boys about their penis size during those formative youthful years. Some men are insecure based on their own fears of inadequacy, even though no partner has ever said or done anything to bring on that fear; some men have had partners hint or allude to the fact that they prefer bigger penises in general; some men have had partners who have expressed the wish that their penis was bigger; some men have had partners who have belittled their penises.
I don't mean that every man is a delicate flower whose ego and and insecurities need to be protected and coddled, and I think it would benefit not only him, but most insecure men to realize and really get that they're most likely just fine as they are, but I think that those who are brushing off ANGST's angst shouldn't.
Okay; what was supposed to be my two cents has turned into about $25. And undoubtedly, since I'm a woman, I'm sure I've got some of it wrong. But I'm sympathetic to him.
This guy isn't ggg enough to be able to go for a threesome; he's insecure about the size of his penis. His girlfriend seems to have behaved childishly for another man's being built similarly to him. That's it. He suggested that they were generally happy together. (I don't know what the age difference details was supposed to mean. It didn't appear relevant to the rest of the letter and now we're left trying to guess its significance and role in their problem. It may just be a detail he threw in to no purpose, like when callers on the podcast start by saying something like "I'm a 32-year-old mostly straight man living in the southeast" and then the problem has nothing to do with the guy's age, straight- or bi- or gay-ness or geographic location. People often just like to start off with some random identifying characteristic.) Are you saying that the girlfriend should leave him because he's insecure about his dick size? Should all BiDanFan's partners leave her because she appears to be a tad insecure about her breast size? Should ANGST's girlfriend leave him because he doesn't want a MFM threesome? Do you know how many straight men don't want to have a MFM threesome? Should all their partners leave them?
ANGST writes that the revelation that she likes large cocks has "paralyzed" him sexually. She's never going to be able to convince him that she doesn't have a thing for large cocks. So if he can't accept that she wants both large cocks and his cock in particular, and he continues to be paralyzed sexually, then how can she stay with him?
Hunter doesn't like ANGST and wants the girlfriend to leave him because of that. Or that's how it reads, anyway.
I think ANGST's immediate overt comparison of their ages indicated a preference for younger that she most likely picked up on. You do not. We can disagree. It's ok. You are not right because you are a special snowflake mindreader. Only ANGST can settle this dispute. We're just different special snowflakes, no pissing contest necessary.
NoCute  - I don't mean that every man is a delicate flower whose ego and and insecurities need to be protected and coddled, and I think it would benefit not only him, but most insecure men to realize and really get that they're most likely just fine as they are
But people are just fine as they are. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. You will never make the most of what you have, if you are stuck in misery because you don't like what you have.
I don't think anyone should feel inadequate. I don't like to see people in pain. But I don't think that indulging insecurity helps. I think it's a band aid and increases one's insecurity in the long run. I think that pointing out the fact that they can still get what they want despite life's rough rolls is a better solution. He can still get a woman who enjoys his dick, even if he wishes he were bigger, as long as he doesn't make his body issues a problem for her. Some women will think it's just perfect, some will think it's satisfactory, some will pass. His options in reality are not so different from a big dicked guy. His girlfriend probably enjoys his dick if she's been GGG the whole time. But that doesn't mean that he can change the way he feels. If seeing his girlfriend with a big dicked guy would devastate him, that's all he needs to communicate to her. Hopefully he is not too insecure to let her go elsewhere for it. Maybe he is. If that's his price of admission, I think he needs to state it up front, so she can decide whether it could work for her or not. I have sympathy for someone who is being deceived or blamed by a partner who can't own how they feel.
If a man wanted his girlfriend of average bust size to try a big boobed FMF, I'd say the same thing. Better the big boobed FMF that you negotiate honestly than finding out about secret midnight corpse crushing, at least he was honest and the request wasn't demented. If he's been GGG for you then I'm sure he likes your boobs enough. And why not give it a shot if you don't mind so much, and there's a nice MFM for you in the future. If it's a fetish too far or he's asking for more than he's willing to give, walk away.
I think that insecurity is a feeling with a purpose. If you've been making bad decisions, you should feel insecure, less confident that you are right. It serves the purpose of motivation to correct some lack of ability or mistaken belief. If you are insecure because you are having trouble accepting unchangeable reality, accepting how your body is shaped or what other people desire, that sounds like the kind of unproductive feeling management that a therapist might help with.
As we are overall in agreement, and I approve of your instinct to demonize the less-demonized, I am inclined to leave it there. It really was more intended as a comment on the runaway train nature of the earlier thread, but I can never resist the opportunity for a bit of Old Bailey frame-setting.
Now for something completely different: the first sentence and a half almost give the impression of his talking about two different people. One almost starts to think of the slightly older woman as his main partner and the girlfriend he has as someone else for about a second and a half. It would considerably improve the letter if they were two distinct women and the second woman (ideally ten or fifteen years his senior) were the one in search of larger equipment.
I think our fascination with breasts goes beyond gender and orientation, because of what they are actually made for and mean to us from our early days. Hence their size, just like a penis, may be associated with “virility.”
And I have
As opposed to a penis they can be modified, yet as you rightfully pointed out this may not be so positive after all. The statement you made, “We've all heard stories of women whose husbands or boyfriends have pressured them to get breast augmentation surgery,” may be a thing of the past.
Sadly enough it seems like there’s plenty of built-in pressure on women nowadays to make them go through the procedure on their own. Yet as opposed to popular thinking quite a few breasts-obsessed men don’t really care for the outcome, a scientific research based on personal experience as well as a conversation with a male coworker.
As for, “Every time a man gets naked with a partner for the first time, he knows his penis is being evaluated…” Not necessarily negative, sometimes being visible is part of the thrill.
As a woman who has chosen to remain childless, I myself have never experienced this, only quietly observed other women (i.e.: my mother, sisters, friends, and others). I think it's a shame that the men who push so forcefully for for their own paternity don't see and understand this.
@126 LavaGirl: Good point. It amazes me how so many men pushing so forcefully for their own paternity don't understand--and couldn't care less, either--how dramatically a woman's body changes during and after just one pregnancy.
So if you're not monogamous to your partner, if you want more than what your partner has to offer sexually, your partner must be unsatisfying?
Wanting to sleep with other people with permission is contempt?
A GGG girlfriend is not valuable?
What's there for him?
The reciprocation. He gets a hall pass if she gets one. He gets a FMF if she gets a MFM.
Maybe he needs more monogamous or more vanilla. He should really figure that out before dating again.
I read he's saying MFM are ok for him, what he's objecting to is her humiliating him and the other man in the process.
Sometimes it seems to me that all your theorizing comes straight from porn.
What did she say or do to shame his dick? I see no indication that his dick size isn't awesome for her. I see indication that she needs guest dicks to be bigger. I think that's far more common than wanting to see your boyfriend act bi.
As for whether it's humiliating that your partner wants more than just you sexually, I think that depends if you are mono or poly. If you feel humiliated to not be your partner's sexual everything, poly won't work well. Even mono people have to acknowledge that their partner is attracted to others when caught masturbating or ogling etc. But a mono vanilla person doesn't have to deal with that fact as much, he might be happier with much less need to think about bigger dicks around his girlfriend.
But after the foursome, she still felt unsatisfied. ANGST didn't understand why, since her "two dick" fantasy had been realized. So she had to explain herself in more graphic terms. To me, that's what she did which ANGST counts as "making a fuss." We don't get her side, of course, but we do get ANGST self-reporting that he has a hang-up about his size. So at a minimum we know that ANGST sees his own insecurities as a problem.
Now, granted, it's probably not that hard for a man to find a partner who won't want outside sex. But if he loves their sex life and their life together except for this one thing, then he might choose to work on his insecurity in order to be able to stay with her.
I seem to be in the minority, in that I think this relationship is salvageable, either with trying for her two dick fantasy or forgoing it.
Hunter78 said, "there are women in 3somes who also want to watch the guys kiss and fuck each other." I can't see this statement as controversial. At a minimum there's me; among all the other women on the planet there must be at least one other.
And I kind of wondered how many MFM threesomes or MMF threesomes Hunter has been in to give him that authority.
I was countering Hunter's assertion that there is little difference between a MFM and a MMF threesome with evidence from my own experiences (7 threesomes, three different sets of two men + me). Perhaps Hunter spoke from his own experience; maybe he participated in what he thought was going to be a MFM threesome and it turned out that the woman wanted the men to "kiss and fuck" each other and wanted to watch. If that's the case, then although I still contend it doesn't mean that there is really very little difference between MFM and MMF, I would accept Hunter's assertion as being supported by his own experience. But he didn't give the evidence to support his claim, and absent support, I concluded it was a specious statement. Hunter, if that was your experience, I can understand why you'd make that statement, but I still challenge it.
And sorry, but you're getting no details of who did what to whom and where and when and how often about life from me.
She might have been saying that the guy was average girth, and was not satisfying because she needed someone closer to his oil can in order to feel nice inside.
But I think that poly desires are more about variety, something different from what your partner offers, so I acknowledge this miscommunication is improbable, they are probably both talking about girth.. unless she misses/wants to experience some cervix banging and they're both talking about length.
Here's me with zero except in my fantazies.. The boys serviced me first then got with each other in one of them.
Think Philo why I most often ended up fucking on top, the size in that position was always good.
Different positions, cock size changes anyway.
Ok, so you are reading Hunter78’s “Btw, a lot of readers have drawn a major distinction between MMF and MFM. In reality the distinction is not so clear.” as an assertion that it is never clear, not that it’s less binary than a continuum. Makes sense.
Thanks so much for your encouragement, by the way! You inspired me to ask for my own MFM/MMF.
Hunter @108: "She knows it hurts him. She said it deliberately. He doesn't mean much to her." -- How do you know this? There have been a lot of letters where the issue is something the partner has said, but we don't know the context in which it was said. Perhaps she was answering a direct question: "Hey, wasn't it fun when we played with Steve and Mary last week? Shall we do it again sometime?" "Well, I wasn't really that into it." "Why not?" "Well, I didn't really get that much enjoyment out of playing with Steve." "Why not?" Etc. And finally the truth comes out: "Well, I was hoping to get a chance to have a really big penis." "What's wrong with his penis? It's the same size as my penis. Are you saying there's something wrong with MY penis!?"
Not saying this happened -- I obviously wasn't there -- just saying "she said it deliberately" might not be the truth.
Philo is of course right. Maybe she is an asshole.
Then again, it would still depend on the hearer having some degree of security in themselves. I've had male partners who interpreted "I'd like some pussy now and again" as "I'm going to leave you." This is probably more often the case with lesbians who date bi women; unlike the other way round, "I'd like some dick now and again" has no potential or actual benefit to the lesbian partner, as it could to the straight dude, should the owner of said other pussy turn out to fancy (a) blokes and (b) him.
Can you quote the part of the letter where you see this? That passage seems not to be present in my reading.
A week on size. Funny as.
For what it's worth, Hunter's not really serious, he's indulging in a fairly common form of macho competition (in this case, sour-grapes gay-shaming) that's set up to score Manliness Points by implying that there's something wrong with another guy's sex life (in this case by equating sexual adventurousness with homosexuality). It's not meant as a statement of fact or belief, it's meant as one-upping belittlement toward other people's sexual mores (and opportunities).
But in a way I'm kind of doing the same by pointing it out, though, so I guess this one's a wash.
Still, I have limited experience and as I suspected, your assertions come from a combination of porn and an extremely distorted and hyper-exaggerated definition of what constitutes homosexual acts (not to mention what seemed to me to be a pretty offensive way to state that definition). I may be simultaneously creating, confirming, and indulging my bias by "casting" my threesomes as I do, but commercial porn equally creates, confirms, and then indulges biases--often biases not necessarily grounded in true or common experience. Porn is selling a product: fantasy sex. Fantasy as in the aspect of fantastic; not realizable, pertaining only to the imagination
Of course I think you mean that I'm biased in terms of what type of men to bring into my threesomes, and that bias according results in acts that limit my ability to exclude it from my reasoning process, rather than that I go in with a bias about what should happen and therefore, that's what I see.
Hunter, I assume this is a response to my post @151 when I said: "Perhaps Hunter spoke from his own experience; maybe he participated in what he thought was going to be a MFM threesome and it turned out that the woman wanted the men to "kiss and fuck" each other and wanted to watch. If that's the case, then although I still contend it doesn't mean that there is really very little difference between MFM and MMF, I would accept Hunter's assertion as being supported by his own experience. But he didn't give the evidence to support his claim, and absent support, I concluded it was a specious statement. Hunter, if that was your experience, I can understand why you'd make that statement, but I still challenge it."
So here you're misinterpreting my response @136 to your assertion @130 that "Btw, a lot of readers have drawn a major distinction between MMF and MFM. In reality the distinction is not so clear. Clearly she wants 2 dicks in her. But there are women in 3somes who also want to watch the guys kiss and fuck each other. And for many het guys, that's an affection too far."
What I was doing was not trying to imply that you're somehow gay or that you have an interest in "act[ing] gayly" because I expressed the idea that you had had a MFM threesome that turned into a MMF one. Indeed, your reaction is totally in line with Eudaemonic's explanation @167 and suggests that you think BiDanFan and I were intending some kind of insult to you by implying that you'd experienced some kind of behavior that only you think of as "gay." It's a pretty homophobic stance and it leads to a reaction in which you end up aggressively homophobically trying to prove your straightness.
Nope, Hunter, what I was doing back @151, was trying, even though I was sure that you've never had an actual experience like that you seemed to consider typical, to give you the opportunity to support your claim with evidence so I could be on equal footing, evidence-wise, with you. It's called "giving you the benefit of the doubt." But then again, clearly you wouldn't see having some grounds for credence as a benefit, if it implied you'd had any contact all with another penis.
But it's very common for people who've never participated in threesomes (or even had the opportunity) to accuse the male participants of gayness. For what it's worth, I briefly tried to think of a way to write 167 without participating in the same dynamic by obviously teasing Hunter for apparently never having gotten so much as an offer, but couldn't really come up with anything. My bad.
The rest of that fantasy I had, was while the guys were enjoying each other, I was being attended to by two women. One a blonde, one a brunette.
To recap: There's no evidence she mentioned anything about dick size before the foursome. ANGST doesn't say she'd been telling him his dick was too small for months -- it came up because of the foursome.
ANGST doesn't mention her ruining the foursome by mocking the men for their dick sizes, so I presumed that she just didn't enjoy herself and got through the foursome as diplomatically as possible.
Afterwards, they talked. Maybe about the foursome, maybe about doing it again, maybe about a threesome. I don't know how it came up, but somehow they were talking and she made clear that she hadn't enjoyed the foursome and wouldn't do threesomes or foursomes again unless a large cock was involved. (That's how I interpret: "she made such a fuss of having someone extra large join in.")
She's still happy to have the same "great sex" with ANGST that they've always had -- there's no evidence she is complaining about sex with him. She just doesn't want to have more multi-partner sex, unless a large dick is involved. That speaks to her desire to experience more than one size of dick, but it doesn't indicate that she was ever rude to ANGST.
She stays for one minute, has a gf in the car, and is dressed in the tightest shorts and top. Double ouch.
Had a word with my son after that she was playing him. If he didn't get to read women better, his heart would be broken many times.
I find it interesting that people want to criticize lw, who acknowledges a history of insecurity over his penis size. I mean who in their right minds has insecurity at 37 amirite? But then I've noticed that in advice columns, comentators expect a perfection few people could every aspire to. Look i'm 40 and i'd love to stand before you and say i'm utterly confident in my pooch and shouldn't I be? I've had it for a life time!!!! But I am insecure and it isn't going to change, so sorry, I wish it would. And I expect my husband to step around it carefully and he does. I'd be devastated if after nutting myself up for a 4 some, he proceeded to make a big deal that the other girl wasn't skinny.
I've the hankering for strange and for sure wouldn't mind a man larger than my husband, but if I have any expectation of getting it, I better tread carefully and gently as I know he would worry about it. Should he have gotten over his dick's size by now, well sure. But he hasn't and I love him and he's worth the effort for me to step carefully around that land mind.
So clap clap, yeah for those of you who have reached perfect acceptance of your body. But most people don't. And i'd warrant we all have a tender spot we don't want touched. I don't think i'd want anyone as a companion who wasn't kind.
Perhaps LW's girlfriend was super gentle with his feelings. Heck maybe she plays the skin flute every day and twice on tuesday. I will take his word that she made a fuss and if so she's a jerk. End of story.
There aren't any quotes in #142. I was asking what part of the letter gave you that impression, because I can't see anything in it to support your interpretation. And I've tried.
"To recap: There's no evidence she mentioned anything about dick size before the foursome. ANGST doesn't say she'd been telling him his dick was too small for months -- it came up because of the foursome."
For what it's worth, my interpretation up to here is the same.
ANGST doesn't mention her ruining the foursome by mocking the men for their dick sizes, so I presumed that she just didn't enjoy herself and got through the foursome as diplomatically as possible.
That's not necessarily how I interpret "We tried playing with a couple to give her the "two-dick experience" she wanted, but the other man was of "average" size and she was not into it.
We tried playing with another couple, but... sounds a bit more like "ruined the foursome" than your interpretation to me, but it's not a complete certainty to me. This could go either way; I'd lay about 75% odds on her having ruined the foursome. But that's a long way from 100. But then it gets dicey:
"I don't know how it came up, but somehow they were talking and she made clear that she hadn't enjoyed the foursome and wouldn't do threesomes or foursomes again unless a large cock was involved. (That's how I interpret: "she made such a fuss of having someone extra large join in.") "
I have a hard time getting that from "Made such a fuss." I generally take the phrase "Made such a fuss" to mean she made a fuss about it.
"She's still happy to have the same "great sex" with ANGST that they've always had -- there's no evidence she is complaining about sex with him. "
Here's the entirety of the post-foursome part of the letter:
"I'm of average stature, and she made such a fuss of having someone extra large join in that it threw my hang-up about my size into overdrive. It's paralyzed me sexually. I'm afraid she'll leave me or run off looking to fulfill her need on her own."
Any mention of her being happy to have "great sex" with him is entirely absent. It's just not there. There is also no mention of her saying or doing anything that would make him think she's satisfied with his size. That's just not in the letter. At all. What is in the letter is a description of his feelings, which are not the feelings often expressed by people who aren't being belittled.
You're right that we don't know how she's been treating ANGST after the foursome--we have no evidence at all, in either direction, except that he's having the reactions of someone who's being treated cruelly. Just to sum up: We have some evidence suggesting at best severe (if casual) cruelty, and absolutely none suggesting that she was diplomatic about anything.
When we have to choose between two interpretations--one that seems to be supported by all of the available (if limited) evidence, and one with no apparent support at all--I find the first one much more likely to be correct.
And yeah, it's ridiculous that people are shaming ANGST for being insecure, when the thing he's worried about is happening to him right now. It's like shaming a kid on patrol in Fallujah for being worried about IEDs, and worse than shaming a woman for being worried about getting slutshamed. We should stop.
Take some time out and reintroduce yourself to the mighty phallus.
Then return to company and never let anyone undermine your strength again.
nocute @ 162:
Porn may also be responsible for popularizing augmented breasts and various hairless trends, first imposed on female performers and now extended to all to some degree or another.
Porn was also instrumental in defining the home video standards back in the days, VHS as opposed to Sony’s Beta, as well as pioneering the transfer of images and videos over the internet.
We need a clearer definition of “what is a threesome” before voters go to the polls: Does a “threesome” only consist of a full-blown sexual encounter between all participants? Will other activities that may not include penetration, maybe not even a physical contact between participants, also count?
Some situations that come to mind: modeling and masturbating as two or more are watching (who may or may not also touch themselves,) dungeon session administered by two or more.
Not that I…
@Nocute 172: "Indeed, your reaction is totally in line with Eudaemonic's explanation @167 and suggests that you think BiDanFan and I were intending some kind of insult to you by implying that you'd experienced some kind of behavior that only you think of as "gay."
Yup. I feel oddly guilty about saying that explicitly, though, like I've violated the Guy Code. Mostly because actually telling people how much of normal macho posturing is about trying to cover up vulnerabilities seems both trite and crass, with an undercurrent of hurting the less fortunate from a position of privilege.
A lot of the performative homophobia is a symptom of pain and (completely justified) fear, rather than the kind of cruelty it's usually taken for--but even pointing that out feels cruel in itself.
*That one was mostly homophobia too, I'm pretty sure.
>>I generally take the phrase "Made such a fuss" to mean she made a fuss about it>>
What does that mean, to you? Screaming at him? Bringing it up over and over when he asked to drop it? What do you think "making a fuss" means?
>> Any mention of her being happy to have "great sex" with him is entirely absent>>
When people say they have "great sex " I take that to mean that the speaker believes that their partner also enjoys the "great sex." What do you think "great sex" means?
And if he's miserable with het preferences, he should leave. Not ask her to have different preferences.
The question is: Was her interest truly objectively insensitive and excessive? Or did it look excessive only because he is sadz that she wants a big dicked MFM? Since we don't know what happened, and there is both reason to side with the letter writer and reason to question one's rational response to self reported hang-ups, it really depends whether you want him to be the asshole, or her to be the asshole.
He doesn't seem to like her. Part of her is that she wants a big dicked threesome. Enough to be emphatic about it, if not rude. He doesn't like that part at all. He doesn't like her. He should let her find someone who likes all of her. Or at least someone who isn't paralyzed by what she likes.
It's coke can, not oil can, for short & thick, or average & thick, right? I'm horrible with colloquialisms.
Or (in the aftermath of her comments after the foursome), if she made no effort to reassure ANGST that she loves sex with him and loves his cock the way it is, then I agree that she was cruel and ANGST would be well advised to leave her immediately.
Will you agree that even if she was reasonably well-behaved during the foursome and even if she did try to reassure ANGST (in the aftermath of her comments after the foursome), that he may still not be able to take any reassurance from her words because of his own insecurities?
It all leads to the same place. If he's miserable with her being the way she is, then he should leave her. But I think the facts in the letter support various different interpretations of what happened here.
So best he move away from her and find some sexual self assurance.
Be happy with who he is and what he's got and celebrate it.
She helps him diminish himself, feeds back to him how he sees himself.
Only thing is for him to be alone for a while, and enjoy himself. Find his own self love, then when he's ready to meet another woman his cock energy will be stronger, healthier.
All this fuss over an MFM. What's worse, slut shaming or pushing others to be more open minded about kink?
When people choose to stay in unhappy relationships, I think it's the start of an abusive relationship. If you can't see a future which would make BOTH people happy, choosing to keep that relationship is cruel. I'm not sure why he's terrified of breaking up, or of bigger dicks sexing up his girlfriend, or of threesomes in general. Maybe she's being unethical, or maybe his issues have other roots. But he does seem miserable, and not likely to follow Dan's advice, so I hope he does leave, preferably without slut shaming her for liking an inconvenient form of sex (for him).
It means the same thing to me that it does to anyone else. It does not mean the opposite of a fuss. I think it's a stretch to take "she made a fuss" to mean "she did not make a fuss."
""When people say they have "great sex " I take that to mean that the speaker believes that their partner also enjoys the "great sex." What do you think "great sex" means?"
I think he made no mention of any great sex after the foursome. He instead said something about "sexually paralyzed," which doesn't sound great to me.
"And if he's miserable with her preferences, he should leave. Not ask her to have different preferences."
Here's the basic disconnect. This has nothing to do with her preferences, it has to do with her actions. He's not telepathic, so he doesn't have any way to be miserable with her preferences, since he doesn't have any way to interact with them directly. Her preferences aren't at issue; her actions are. All available evidence says her actions were pretty shitty. No available evidence says otherwise.
"Eudaemonic, do you think she used to enjoy sex with ANGST (hence "great sex ") but since the foursome with an average-sized dick she no longer enjoys sex with ANGST?"
I think we have absolutely no evidence about their post-foursome sex. There is not one word about it in the letter, other than "it's paralyzed me sexually."
So if we're going to fill in the blanks, we should fill them in with stuff that induces sexual paralysis, whatever that is, rather than with stuff that's in conflict with the evidence we have.
"Eudaemonic, if she ruined the foursome by reacting with obvious displeasure when she saw the new man's cock, then I agree that she is a terrible person and ANGST would be well advised to leave her immediately. "
Okay, good. We have a little bit of evidence suggesting that she did that, and no evidence that she didn't. Which assumption should we make?
"Or (in the aftermath of her comments after the foursome), if she made no effort to reassure ANGST that she loves sex with him and loves his cock the way it is, then I agree that she was cruel and ANGST would be well advised to leave her immediately. "
Good. Is there anything in the letter that indicates she made any effort to reassure ANGST? I ask because there doesn't seem to be. Like, can you quote me the line where he said "Despite her efforts to reassure me..." or anything like that?
"Will you agree that even if she was reasonably well-behaved during the foursome and even if she did try to reassure ANGST (in the aftermath of her comments after the foursome), that he may still not be able to take any reassurance from her words because of his own insecurities?"
Absolutely. "Your dick's too small," like "you're too old and fat to be worth fucking," is a relationship-ending sentence. People who express that sentiment earn a DTMFA, because it's deliberate cruelty; if someone's permanently inadequate to your sexual needs, you break up, you don't torture them about it.
But let's not pretend this is about her preferences; this is about the unforgivable way she treated him. If we want to ask a hypothetical about "what if she had the same preferences, but expressed them without being unforgivably cruel?" that's fine, but can we say that specifically? I don't have a problem with changing the hypothetical in order to make it a more interesting question, but I'd rather that was explicitly labeled to avoid confusing it with garbage like Philo who thinks cruelty is only a problem when it targets women.
"It all leads to the same place. If he's miserable with her being the way she is, then he should leave her."
Yes. We don't know her, obviously, and we only have a little to go on. What little we have suggests that the "way she is" is "Brutally cruel, and interested in large cocks." The problem isn't with the second trait.
"But I think the facts in the letter support various different interpretations of what happened here."
But which facts in the letter support your interpretation? The line about her doing anything to mitigate the cruelty is just not there.
Philo @193: "Aw he had a sadz, there must be someone to blame."
Imagine if you met someone who was as callous about your feelings as you are about men's.
He wrote: "I'm afraid she'll leave me or run off looking to fulfill her need on her own."
When people are scared of being left, isn't that a sign they value the other person and don't feel cruelly mistreated?
Valuing someone is not proof they're treating you well. It would be, but only if people were perfectly rational.
LW: “Hey, wasn't it fun when we played with Steve and Mary last week? Shall we do it again sometime?”
GF: “No. Like I told you before, that’s not my fantasy. I gave it a try because you wanted to, but I’m not bi and I didn’t get as much cock as I wanted to.”
LW: “Hey, I did this for you! There were two cocks and you seemed to be having fun.”
GW: “Like I told you before, my fantasy is all about being the centre of attention and getting major cock. That’s not what happened with Steve and Mary: we just swapped, and since his cock isn’t any bigger than yours there was no point. If you can’t bring yourself to give me a DP and all we’re going to do is swap, there’s no point unless the guy has a giant dick or something.”
LW: “You always said you liked my dick!”
GF: “I do like your dick. But my fantasy is about major cock, not swapping.”
LW: “You even came!”
GF: “You aren’t listening.”
Because she isn’t backing down and agreeing with him that wife-swapping fulfills her fantasy, he thinks she’s making a fuss — because she picks her battles and normally does back down after a couple of attempts.
LW: “Let’s pick up some takeout at that lebanese place.”
GF: “I find the food there too salty. It makes me bloat. Can we get chinese instead?”
LW: “You really liked the shish taouk last time. Do you want that again or do you want the shawarma? My treat.”
GF: “Whatever. I’ll have one of those chicken brochettes then.” [And then withdraws all evening.]
She could repeat over and over and over again that no, when she said she didn’t want lebanese she really didn’t want lebanese until he got all hurt and offended and wondered why she was all of a sudden making such a fuss about lebanese food, why all of a sudden it was such a big deal. Or she could just get tired and back down.
I suspect that’s why EricaP wanted to know what “making a fuss” means to you. Because to me it can be as simple as quietly not being steamrolled. (Though it’s true, when a guy gets upset because you are uncharacteristically standing up for yourself it can be hard to keep a cheerful demeanour. There may be some teeth-gritting. Possibly even tears of frustration as you wonder why being heard has to be so damn hard.)
This happens to us a lot.
So to clarify, do you consider the GF in the imaginary script above to be “making a fuss?”
I am no expert but decided to try having a 3-way to celebrate my 50th B day. It was FMF & It was so much fun I had to repeat it rather soon thereafter. The same thing happened when I turned 60.
I have been curious about a MFM 3-way. Have not acted on that one. It needs more "fantasy rehearsal" on how it might go. My two cents worth.
Sometimes, when a guy thinks he's being treated badly it's because he's being treated badly. You seem to be discarding this possibility preemptively. Apparently you think it's impossible? Why? I mean, are you unaware that women are human beings? And that, like all human beings, sometimes they do good things and sometimes they do bad things?
I notice that in today's thread no one is trying to come up with versions of this where the brother's wife consented to his affairs even if she thinks she didn't. No one is pushing an alternate narrative where really it's the LW who's cheating rather than her brother. Why aren't you? It's not any less supported than your version here.
Your version seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the letter, and absolutely everything to do with an unquestioned assumption that a man in pain always has only himself to blame, and that the people hurting him--as long as they're women--are always blameless, no matter what they do.
Women are people. When they choose to hurt people, it is not their victim's fault. When they choose to hurt people, their victims are not pretending to be hurt. When a woman hurts someone, it does not actually help you with me to push a false narrative about how she's not hurting anyone. I get why you benefit from pushing the fashionable narrative in which women are never in the wrong, no matter who they hurt, but I'm never going to buy it. You should really know this by now, so what are you aiming to gain here?
>>Imagine if you met someone who was as callous about your feelings as you are about men's.>>
>>garbage like Philo who thinks cruelty is only a problem when it targets women>>
Hm, where might I have learned that people have a tendency to act callously in anger based on fear? Well, maybe Yoda said it first, but this kind of experience drives the point home. "Garbage" is a step up from "piece of shit" but still abusive. I don't believe I've been abusive toward Eudaemonic.. I haven't addressed him at all in this column. But he still thinks that I'm in the wrong, making a fuss. He still feels that abusing me is "right" for him, or he wouldn't call me garbage. Eudaemonic may even feel that I'm abusing him, although he can't point out a quote where I'm abusing him. I think this irrational response happened because he's insecure about how men are treated by women, he has an irrational fear that men will be mistreated by women which guides his actions. What appears to me as anger and offense probably appears to him as fear and rational defense against a clear danger. Which is odd, we are both advising ANGST to leave, we only disagree whether she deserves blame and anger or if their sex preferences are incompatible, a simple bad match.
ANGST, like Eudaemonic, should leave unhappy relationships, instead of pursue them more doggedly. If not, if you're unable to disengage from unhappy relationships, they will inevitably become abusive. I'm basically talking about relationship addiction or codependence. Sometimes the only abuse is some discreet cheating or fund siphoning. Sometimes things get physical, especially if the secret partner or secret account is discovered.
But people are not swayed by logic so much as emotion. If ANGST wants to stay in an unhappy relationship, he will, and all the sympathy in the world won't convince him to leave until he can imagine being single and happy, or until he finds a more appealing partner.
Anyone who thinks it's ruder to call a bigot a bigot than it is to publicly dehumanize vulnerable targets needs to seriously reexamine their priorities.
If anyone ever treated women the way Philo treats men, there would be riots.
What a good person you are.
ANGST says that his girlfriend is completely GGG, but he is not, because he hates the idea of an MFM. So he knows she's more GGG, and can accept the idea of an FMF. He's probably sure about this because they've had an FMF.
He took advantage of her GGG-ness to get his fantasy, and is balking at reciprocation, it's also why he's afraid of being dumped, because he knows he's been unfair to his girlfriend.
I'm completely aware that this is as unprovable as "she cruelly said his dick was too small for her".
Yes Eudaemonic, I'm claiming that I didn't abuse you. Can you prove me wrong with an actual quote? Or can you just yell completely unsubstantiated complaints about how abusive I am?
I am writing about a situation I see as gender neutral.
People have insecurities, to greater or lesser degrees. I have insecurities. Mr. P. has insecurities.
People have tact, to greater or lesser degrees. I have tact. Mr. P. has tact.
Mr. P. and I have each confessed to the other about something we wanted that we weren't getting (and apparently weren't able to get) from our marriage. We each revealed that we felt insecure about what the other person wanted. But we each used enough tact that we were each able to work through our insecurities and move forward, encouraging each other to find what we wanted outside the marriage. No one was demonized in the process.
I have said from the beginning that there is an incompatibility in ANGST's situation, where his gf's tact doesn't match his need for tact. Whatever the cause -- whether his insecurities are high or her tact is low, or both -- they can't move forward unless something changes, because he is currently paralyzed sexually. Since he's the one writing in, I'm emphasizing what he could change: he could work on his insecurities so that her level of tact (whatever it is) would be sufficient. If that's not possible, because her level of tact is so low as to reach asshole territory (as you believe is clear from the evidence), then they have no path forward except to break up. I still don't see the gendered aspect of this.
I'm not talking indulging each other, there are some lines one doesn't cross, to go forward. Doesn't matter what this woman said or tries to say, she has indicated to this man, he isn't good enough for her sexually.
He can't unhear this. Best he not spend years playing it over in his head, wish her well in her big cock searches..
and find a woman/ women who find him and his sexuality very pleasing to her/ them.
I appreciate the beauty of both sexes in a new way.
Was it that article in VF about hookup culture or elsewhere, the young women saying the young men were having trouble with erections. This can't be good.
Like with the situation where young women are losing their desire, is the same happening for young men?
I'm for honouring each other's sex.
Pragmatic battles are left elsewhere.
You’re making things up. I didn't say that’s what happened: I specified that it was imaginary and I asked you a question which you chose to ignore.
You’re ignoring the facts. In the other thread you refer to, while people aren’t hypothesizing that the LW is cheating, I and several other people have called her a liar.
Do you think it’s possible that the LW in that fictional account feels like her insistence that no, she hadn’t gotten what she wanted, is raising a fuss? What if she ends up raising her voice or bursting into tears?
That's all well and good, but how far does this go? If your husband tactfully hints that he's seriously considering leaving you but hasn't quite decided, is it ok to feel insecure at that point? Or would that reaction indicate that you have more "work" to do on yourself?
I have insecurities.
I disagree with this phrasing. Insecurity in healthy adults is almost always more a characteristic of the situation than the person. It's not an accident that insecurity about breast size is almost exclusively limited to women with small breasts, or insecurity about height is almost exclusively limited to short men, or dick size to small men, or weight to heavy women, and so on. There is, after all, an unmistakable cultural preference for large tits, tall men, large dicks, and trim women, and one is reminded of these preferences every time one turns on the TV, opens a magazine, launches their web browser, or goes out in public. One may even be reminded by one's own preferences for big tits, tall men, large dicks, and/or slender women.
You may have feelings of insecurity, but these are a normal, rational reactions to situations of insecurity. I'm also going to say that they are healthy reactions, because I can't imagine being with someone who was so perfect or thought so highly of themselves or was so high on Jesus or New Age California bullshit that they never had cause to feel insecure. I prefer my humans to be human.
seandr @221, agreed that most of us have some level of insecurity about traits where we don’t match the cultural preference. Certainly as we age, for instance, many of us develop insecurity about looking old in a culture which values youth over age.
When my partner runs up against my insecurity – I catch them looking at someone young, and say, “hey, do you now think I’m too old to look sexy?” – the solution can’t just be for my partner to lie and say that he doesn’t notice any difference between youth and age. He has to use tact. For me, the following lines would help: “Honey, you are as beautiful as always” and “I would never date someone that young – but it’s fun to look at them, don’t you think?”
At the same time, as a reasonable, sensible adult, I have to do some work on my own side, and not demand constant reassurances that I look as good as today’s young adults.
It’s a balance. But finding that balance has nothing to do with the hypothetical in your first paragraph:
>> he's seriously considering leaving you but hasn't quite decided, is it ok to feel insecure at that point? >>
That’s not a moment for tact or for working on one’s insecurities. That’s a moment for both people to be their most honest selves, and tackle whatever the real issues are head-on, in order to figure out if they are fundamentally compatible or not.