My sexy GGG husband and I fuck a “good friend” semiregularly. He’s hot, young, and game to fuck about every other week. We started out wearing condoms, but we’ve had the safe-sex conversation and our good friend isn’t banging anyone else, so we’ve moved to condom-free sex. A month ago, we had a hot threesome. Our good friend fucked me, but came on my tits. My husband fucked me, too—that night, the day before, the day after. Now I find out I’m pregnant. I’m 99 percent sure that it’s my husband’s, but a tiny part of me worries. What are the chances that it’s my sexy friend’s child and not my husband’s? Without our good friend coming inside me? And with all the semen left in me by my husband? Could our “other” sex partner’s pre-come get me pregnant? Please tell me it’s probably my husband’s! I’m freaking out!

Pregnant In Threesome

It’s probably your husband’s, PIT, but…

Pre-come can contain “live, viable, pregnancy-inducing sperm,” says Dr. Joel Maurer, assistant professor in OB/GYN and dean of admissions for the Michigan State University College of Human Medicine. “Most [studies have found] that it contains very little, if any, sperm,” says Dr. Maurer, but the possible presence of those live, viable, pregnancy-inducing sperm cells means it could be your good friend’s child, not your husband’s.

It’s also why many—including Dr. Maurer—regard “pulling out” as an ineffective birth-control method.

“For every 100 women who use withdrawal correctly, four will become pregnant every year—this number jumps to 27 if not used correctly,” says Dr. Maurer. (For every 100 women who use condoms correctly, two will become pregnant, 18 if they’re using condoms incorrectly, which is why some argue that withdrawal is nearly as effective as condoms.)

Backing up: Pre-come is produced by the Cowper’s gland and some other gland whose name I can never remember, PIT, while sperm cells are produced in the nuts. Sperm doesn’t get mixed up in the seminal fluid—produced by the prostate and a couple of other glands whose names escape me—until the guy starts to ejaculate. So if your good friend didn’t have an orgasm shortly before he fucked you and he didn’t come inside you and there were no stray swimmers in his pre-come for some other reason, odds are slim that the baby is his. It’s possible, PIT, but nowhere near probable.

“A paternity test after delivery of the child is the safest advice I can give should it remain an important issue to her and her husband,” says Dr. Maurer. “An amniocentesis can make this ‘diagnosis’ before delivery, but the procedure comes with a small risk of pregnancy loss. As such, most doctors would consider it unethical to perform amniocentesis for the sole purpose of paternity testing without a coexisting medical reason.”

To all the other nonmonogamous straight couples out there: Not using condoms with your other is fucking stupid. Using condoms with others is important not just to prevent disease but, if your other is a dude, to prevent paternity scares like the one PIT is having. And you should be using condoms with your other, male or female, regardless of safe-sex conversations or assurances that your other isn’t banging anyone else. Unless your other lives in a cage in your basement—very hot, not very practical—you have no way of knowing for sure that your other doesn’t have other others.

After an impromptu sex session that left me feeling sleepy and sappy, my partner, who typically feels sleepy and sappy herself after sex, texted someone! The fury that arose within me could not be contained! Neither the text message itself nor its recipient were the issue (it was to a coworker about a work matter), the issue was that she couldn’t wait a few minutes to hug and kiss and say “that was hot” before sending a text?!? She thinks I’m overreacting and blames it on me being premenstrual. She has not apologized. How does she not get it? Isn’t post-sex texting tacky?

Wasn’t That Fucked?

Post-sex texting is tacky, WTF, and it’s thoughtless. I can understand why you were annoyed. I can also understand why your girlfriend has refused to apologize. If one ill-timed text sent your panties so far up your crack that it unleashed a “fury that could not be contained”—if you raged at your girlfriend for being uncharacteristically inconsiderate (it sounds like she usually makes with the postcoital hugs, kisses, compliments, etc.)—then yours was the greater offense.

Don’t get me wrong: Your girlfriend owes you an apology. But you owe her a bigger one, WTF, and yours should come first.

I’m a submissive gay man. All anal sex guides stress that when done right, anal sex should cause no pain. But what if I want pain? Over three years, my boyfriend and I have proceeded from having lots of anal foreplay to lube-it-up-and-stick-it-in. I love it, and once it stops hurting, as it always does after a while, I have amazing orgasms. So does he. There’s a definite line between the arousing kind of pain and too much pain. But that line has moved closer to more intense pain, and I’m worried about injury. Then again, we’re not sticking progressively bigger objects up my ass, just the same object with less foreplay. Is this risky?

Boy Used To Taking

It depends, BUTT.

You can enjoy lube-it-up-and-stick-it-in anal without incurring too great a risk of injury so long as your boyfriend isn’t shoving his entire dick up your ass in one thrust. If he’s pushing his dick in you gradually but firmly, giving your poor butt a chance to relax and adjust as he “forces” his way in, then you’ll probably be okay. (Probably is the word of the day.)

That said, BUTT, while it’s a fine thing to enjoy a little pain during sex—or “sensation play,” as the kinksters have taken to calling it—making your asshole the focus of erotic pain isn’t a sensational idea. Anal fissures and tears take forever to heal, and even a small one can put your ass out of commission for months. A big one can put your ass out of commission for years.

There are plenty of ways your boyfriend can make you hurt during anal without brutalizing your hole. He can slap your ass, yank on a pair of tit clamps, pull your hair, crank up the juice on an e-stim unit. You’ve got nerve endings all over your body, not just in and around your hole.

I’m a gay man in my 20s. While I love reading your advice for red-state kinksters, straight married folks, and lesbians with hymens, I’m wondering where the gay has gone. Can we get a column or two with an assortment of questions addressing the problems facing gay men in their 20s? Something for gay boys at that stage of life that falls between “it gets better” and “it gets domestic”?

Feeling Left Out

Happy to—hit me with some Qs, gay boys, and I’ll dedicate a couple of columns to your issues and tissues.

Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.

mail@savagelove.net

@fakedansavage on Twitter

166 replies on “Savage Love”

  2. @144 & @147: From your highly illogical bouts of exaggerated hysteria, I didn’t bother to read your “links” about Latin. I didn’t have to. @152 just proved that you’re about as clueless about language and logic as PIT and her partners are about preventing unwanted pregnancy.

    @154: You still haven’t answered captainlobster’s question, Snorky.
    All argument and no brains, huh? That won’t get you very far in life, Vinnie Boobarino.

    @152 captainlobster: BRAVO!!!! And LOL!! I didn’t even bother to read the bogus “links” posted by doofus! and his constipation because I knew that reading anything he posted was a waste of time.

  3. ibid 154 and I’m curious why you think I would respond to 152 since it wasn’t addressed to me.

    Thank you Hunter78, perhaps you can contact some of the other long term posters to do another intervention.

  4. 152 If your question is a serious one, look up the history of law, mathematics, medicine, music, and science as a starting point. There were reasons why Isaac Newton and Galileo, to name just two giants, corresponded and published in Latin.

    Personally I have absolutely no use for organized religion in general or the Roman Catholic Church in particular with its doctrine of papal infallibility.

    My original point was that if you had questions about Latin you could start with a Google search to find your answers.

    I could have referenced Greek, but its alphabet is even less intelligible than the cyrillic one and all the major works were translated into Latin. We still use the Latin alphabet and without Latin we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

    The links I provided required one simple Google search to find. They were provided as examples, not as explanation. If I have a question, don’t understand a comment, or am just curious I do the research myself whenever I can.

  5. PIT: Abortion. Now. Why is this even a question?

    @152: Classical Latin often used periodic sentences, which have a much more complex structure than the typical English sentence. And when verbs come at the end of a sentence, you have to have the beginning of the sentence in your head, and then read to the end to understand it.

    @109/111: I love cuddling after sex, and cuddling in general, but not everyone does all the time. Cuddling should be seen as just like any other activity: you talk about it and compromise. So if my partner texts after sex, “Hey, come cuddle with me for a few minutes please” is fine. Or just ask “Hey, wanna cuddle? Sleep? Fuck again? Get food? Take some time for ourselves on our phones?”

  6. @156 & @157: What? Out of control? ME? Little ol’ me? Hark who’s trolling!
    You guys with nothing better to do crack me up, always, have, and always will. If I’m pissing any or all of you off, I must be getting someone’s attention. I don’t see any of my comments getting pulled.

    @158: Thank you for the clarifications concerning the research of Latin through Google and use of different alphabets. And no, I’m not being sarcastic.

    @159: Thank you, BlackRose, for explaining Classical Latin even more.

    Everybody have a safe, sane, healthy & prosperous 2012!

  8. Re: Latin. (I know this is off-topic for this group, but I’m bored and find the inoffensive discussion interesting.)

    First, let me admit that I’m totally prejudiced in favor of Latin. All logic aside, I like the idea because I just like it. I’ve never taken Latin, but when I’ve learned a little here or there, it’s always seemed interesting and wonderful.

    Then I looked at Snark’s webpages and don’t think the arguments in favor of teaching Latin make sense. The one about how people enjoy it does, but the others don’t. Sure studying Latin makes learning French easier, but I can’t see that 3 years of Latin followed by 3 years of French is more efficient than just 6 years of French. If French was your goal, it makes more sense just to teach it.

    Same for English vocabulary. If that’s your goal, then reading a broad range of books in English with attention paid to the vocabulary is surely more efficient than studying Latin roots.

    Same for English grammar. Grammar is important, so teach it. Don’t start with Latin as though you needed to understand it in order to understand English.

    Same for understanding the large handful of Latin phrases you see on public buildings or in legal and medical texts.

    Which makes it sound like I agree with Lobster in 142, but I don’t. I said I was prejudiced so here goes. The question is how teaching Latin helps students learn to think logically, coherently, and concisely.

    The problem, as I see it, is that teachers could try to teach those things in any subject, but they don’t. You could have a vocabulary class that focused on the nuances of words and how they can be used in different ways and how there’s an elegance in seeing the historical connection in how words have changed in meaning over the centuries, but as a rule, vocabulary isn’t taught that way in English classes. There’s a chance that it is taught that way in Latin ones.

    Grammar is usually taught in a way helps students avoid the worst of the grammar errors one runs into in English. That’s all very well and good, but that’s the minimum. At no point does one have the chance to understand the bare bones of the language, to understand the deep structures of how a sentence is constructed, really how it’s built. English grammar could be taught that way, but it isn’t. It hasn’t for 70 years. (That number was pulled out of the air. 100 years? 50 years?) Somehow instead of reforming the English curriculum, the gaps are filled with Latin.

    When teaching living romance languages, the emphasis is put on colloquial expressions. That’s great if the goal is to get the students speaking right away. No sense having them memorize and conjugate a bunch of verbs if they’re going to melt down the first time a French speaker asks “ca va?” or if they’re going to translate “Ca m’est egal” as “that to me is equal” instead of “fine with me.”

    But then they’re not really learning the structure and thought processes that go with a language when studying a foreign one. They’re learning the exceptions when there’s a longing, at least for some of us, to know the rules.

    I wish English composition and expository writing could start with what used to be called rhetoric. I’d love it if logic were taught in English classes. Imagine if everyone knew what an ad hominem attack was and recognized them in the nightly news. The difference between cause and correlation isn’t even spelled out in science classes. They jump straight to what is known from science but don’t spend enough time on what’s meant by proof. It applies to the social sciences also. It’s easy to look at an historical event, but the meat of the subject is in how one event causes another– or doesn’t– or has unintended consequences.

    I can’t be sure, but I suspect that people are drawn to Latin classes because Latin has become the dumping ground for many of the good ideas that used to be taught but that have been discarded in the name of efficiency.

  9. @162 (Crinoline), since you mentioned a topic I also love, I can’t avoid adding my $0.02… Hopefully I won’t bore anyone with this.

    The old rationale for teaching the classics — Latin, Ancient Greek, Classical Literature, Graeco-Roman Mythology, Philosophy, sometimes even Rhetorics — was, I think, a continuation of the Greek idea of paidea or education: these are simply interesting topics that make a person deeper in that s/he becomes more capable of evaluating, understanding, and appreciating the heritage of the Western culture (which has its roots in Classical Antiquity).

    Of course it’s a lot of work. Of course there are more practical things one could do. And all the ones you mention are right: claiming that Latin helps you learn other languages is true, but beside the point. Learning English also makes it easier to learn German, but I think nobody who learns English ever learn it for this reason (and if they wanted to learn German they’d concentrate on German instead, thus avoiding German-English “false friends” like Gift (‘present’ in English, ‘poison’ in German).

    So to me it’s beside the point that learning Latin might help you learn Spanish or French; if your target are these two languages you should concentrate on them, not on Latin.

    What Latin opens to you is a treasure chest of old Roman traditions — a door to a different culture in the past, and one from which so many of our roots come from. (Why is there a Capitol in Washington? Why does “Republic” rhyme with “public”? Where does “subpoena” come from? Why do Harry Potter’s spells often sound like Latin?… etc.) Besides being in itself a beautiful language, with a beautiful literature that can be enjoyed for its own merits (“oh passer deliciae meae puellae…”), just like French or Italian literature also can. All of that leads to a deeper appreciation of why we are the way we are — like studying history or literature in general.

    Advising people to really study Latin — as opposed to simply learning declensions by heart (“rosa rosa rosam, rosae rosae rosā”) — is thus part of that idea about education as being not simply that which prepares us for doing the things we’ll have to do in order to survive and flourish, but also that which shows us what human depth is and why it is valuable.

    That is the real value, I think. One may claim that ‘Latin trains your mind’ (frankly, trying to understand the structure of any different language trains your mind; Australian aboriginal languages would be just as good as ‘mental puzzles’ to develop your analytical muscles as Latin) or ‘helps your spelling’ (except, of course, when English differs from Latin… in which case it doesn’t) or ‘makes you sound intelligent’ (true to a certain extent, but this just results from ‘cultural prestige’, like speaking with a British accent, which is not a constant; besides, it can also make you sound pedantic or arrogant, as was the case with the Latin examples in this comment thread).

    None of this really matters in the end. Latin is interesting because it’s a real language that a certain people used to express ideas, thoughts, feelings. It’s beautiful, and it’s part of our history. What else is necessary?

  12. Crinoline & anklosaur!! I missed you!!!!

    Thanks for sharing even further insights on Latin and other languages. I would like to study German, Italian, Japanese, and other langauges.

  13. 163– What else is necessary? Ah, there’s the crux of it. If you’re going to spend public money on public education, there are going to be a lot of people who say that it shouldn’t be on fun and games. After all, if “certain people” get beauty and interest out of Latin, why not teach video games and I Dream of Jeanie reruns for certain other people who find those beautiful and interesting?

    To argue against that sort of thinking, you have to show that one is useful to the larger society while the other is not. You have to show that education isn’t just for personal enrichment; that personal enrichment is going to serve the greater good in the form of the society’s benefit in having people who understand the broad scope of human history, who can think analytically, concisely, critically, and logically. The pros and cons to teaching Latin might come down to a back and forth between those who think there’s societal value in individuals following any personal enrichment and those who think individuals only serve society in concrete obvious ways.

    (An analogy. The regulars on this comments column vary greatly, but we all might have in common a general feeling that the free expression of sexuality is an end in itself that needs no justification. I don’t think it has to serve the greater society, but there are times when I have to defend my position by pointing out that the free expression can serve the greater society. Yet that’s a stretch. Look at all the ways The Greater Society has sought to subvert sexual desire into narrow institutions. So it becomes the back and forth as above.)

    166-Auntie G– I missed you too. For a while there, it was like someone hacked your account.

  14. @167: Yeah—the trolls were running amok! I guess they finally went back to their caves. I suppose I helped provide some crazy holiday entertainment for a while. But actually I was really asking some angry(?) posters why they were getting so hostile over my original comment from @18.

    All I said was that the prevention of unplanned pregnancy was the equal responsibility of all participants in a threesome. Then all hell broke loose among the argumentative. It was like a bunch of rabid, nonsense-spewing insaniacs were on their menstrual period, or last nerve, and I was standing on it.
    I’m glad you’re back!!

  15. Crinoline: Thankfully, nobody hacked my account; I just got egged on, and my bozo alert button went off.
    DAMN—and I’m not drunk, stoned, or on my period, either! Hooo boy.
    It’s been an interesting week.

  16. @162/163 – Thank you for beautifully articulating everything I loved about my Latin classes in high school. I didn’t realize exactly why I loved them so much until just now. You’ve given me a new appreciation for them, and I’m sincerely grateful. 🙂

Comments are closed.