Have boyfriend. Several months. Love sex. First time we sixty-nine, I notice he has a little turtlehead sticking out. You get me? Second time, he has bits of toilet paper stuck in that area. CAN I ADDRESS THIS? And how do I do it without giving him a permanently flaccid penis? I love this man to pieces and know this is a humiliating topic. Please help!
Mired In The Mud
Got you. Wish didn’t. But did.
If you don’t have the nerve to speak up when someone is grinding shitbuds and dingleberries in the vicinity of your nostrils, MITM, I’m not sure there’s anything I can say that’s gonna help. But for what it’s worth…
YES, YOU ADDRESS IT! IMMEDIATELY!
When someone pushes your face into a dirty asscrack—or allows you to place your face in the general vicinity of a dirty asscrack—you say something along the lines of “What the fuck, dude, go take a dump and jump in the shower! Christ!” His ego, to say nothing of his future erections, should be your least concern at a moment like that. So you say it without hesitation, without concern for his feelings, and you say it as you leap out of bed and reach for your shirt, pants, car keys, and phone. You don’t just lie there pretending that his buttrasta isn’t dangling over your nose. Even if he’s never able to get another erection with you, MITM, he’ll know to spot-check for cleanliness—are there no washcloths in Gilead?—before he crawls on top of anyone else.
I’m a 23-year-old gay guy. I’ve been talking to a nice guy who will possibly become my first boyfriend. The little quibble I’m having is… I’m a virgin. It’s not that big a deal to me—it just hasn’t happened yet—but I was wondering if I should mention it to this guy. He made an aside about virginity (unprompted by me) during one of our chats: “No, I’m not a virgin, that’s nothing that you should worry about with me.” That was probably my opportunity to tell him, but I didn’t. Should I have told him? What if I tell him during sex? Could that make it hot?
Thank you for what you do. I found the courage to come out because of you.
Ready And Willing
If you found the courage to come out to family and friends about being gay—which you found inside yourself, RAW, but thanks for the nice compliment—you can come out to this boy about being a virgin.
Don’t tell him during sex, RAW, and don’t tell him in a way that makes this relevant information about your sexual history—you don’t have one—seem like a character flaw, a cancer diagnosis, or a request for an open marriage six years after you began an adulterous affair with a congressional staffer. You’re just a 23-year-old virgin, RAW, there’s nothing wrong with you; it’s not like you’re one of Elizabeth Santorum’s idiotic gay friends or a cast member of The A-List: Dallas. The next time you see this boy, initiate a casual, low-stakes, getting-to-know-you make-out session at a time when you can’t transition to full-on, no-holes-barred gay sex. Relax, kiss the boy, be chill. Then pause and inform him that you’re not very sexually experienced—in fact, you’ve never been with anyone. Reassure him that you’re not a duckling—you’re not going to imprint on the first dick you see—but that you wanted him to know.
How are you supposed to react to the discovery—entirely accidental—that your youngest brother has a “femdom” relationship with his wife? I stumbled over my brother’s “anonymous” sex blog. It goes into detail about the “domestic discipline” she subjects him to: humiliation, spanking, “ruined orgasms” (whatever that is!), cuckolding. There are no names, but there are pictures. Their faces are blurred out, but I recognize their living room, their bedroom, the necklace my sister-in-law wears, my brother’s chin and hair. If I recognized them, other family members might. What do I say?
Biggest Big Bro
Besides “Hey, bro, I’m kinky, too!”? (You “stumbled over” your brother’s kinky sex blog? How’d that happen? Did he leave it sitting in your driveway?) If you can’t bring yourself to say that, BBB, you say nothing and trust that more-distant, less-kinky family members are unlikely to “stumble over” your brother’s anonymous femdom blog anytime soon. And even if they do, they’re probably not familiar enough with your brother and sister-in-law’s home, jewelry, chins, etc., to recognize him.
Congrats, Dan. It looks like you’ve got your first high-profile “monogamish” public figure: Newt Gingrich. You must be so proud.
Savage Can’t Understand Monogamy
For anyone who spent last week under a rock: Newt Gingrich, brave defender of traditional marriage, was still married to his second wife—and still fucking the consecrated host out of his “devout Catholic” mistress—when he asked his second wife to agree to an open marriage. Newt had been fucking Callista, his devoutly Catholic mistress, for six years when he made the big ask. Newt’s second wife wouldn’t agree to an open marriage, according to Newt’s second wife, which is how she became Newt’s second ex-wife and Newt’s mistress—the devoutly Catholic Callista—became Newt’s third wife.
That’s not monogamish, SCUM. That’s CPOSish. And lumping honest nonmonogamists—people who don’t lie or cheat—in with the likes of the Gingriches and Schwarzeneggers of the world, which whiny and insecure monogamists (who are not to be confused with reasonable and secure monogamists) are always doing, is simply unfair. Newt, like Arnold before him, didn’t succeed at nonmonogamy, he failed at monogamy.
Zooming out for a moment: The Gingrich campaign has presented the holesome story of Newt and Callista’s courtship as a redemption narrative: Newt is a better man today thanks to Callista, he’s better suited to be president thanks to Callista, and he’s better prepared to defend traditional marriage thanks to Callista. She’s been described as a “devout Catholic” in every profile written about her—so devout that her love brought Newt to the one, holy, Catholic, apostolic, and ever-more-rabidly anti-gay church. So it seems to me that it’s fair to ask if Callista knew in advance that Newt was proposing an open marriage to his then-wife and approved of the arrangement. (It might be more accurate to say that Newt informed his second wife that she was already in an open marriage and asked if she wanted to remain in it.) Did Callista know about Newt’s open marriage proposal? Did Newt bounce the idea off his devoutly Catholic mistress first? Maybe right after he finished bouncing himself off his devoutly Catholic mistress?
Would the devout Catholic still be Newt’s mistress today if the second Mrs. Gingrich had agreed to remain in the marriage that Newt had already opened?
This news alters the redemption narrative that the Gingrich camp set before the voters. So questioning Callista about the open marriage proposal—what did the mistress know and when did she know it?—seems like an entirely legit line of inquiry to me.
Callista Gingrich, like her vile husband, doesn’t believe that gays and lesbians should be equal under the law because, as a good Catholic, she believes that homosexuality is a sin and that homosexuals should remain celibate. Well, the Catholic Church considers adultery, divorce, and birth control sinful, too. Someone in the liberal media really ought to ask Callista to explain why her faith should place limits on my sexual expression but not her own.
Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.
@fakedansavage on Twitter
@36, I can’t understand that while Newt is expressing outrage that the topic of his infidelity be raised in the media, no one can seem to recall that Newt pushed online publication of an unedited Starr report with salacious details of Clinton’s encounter with Monica Lewinsky.
It was unmanly of Gingrich to not let Clinton see the report before it was published online for tens of millions of people to see. And so Newt wants us to feel outrage that we have the nerve to notice his hypocrisy.
As the late James Garner used to say, “Nuck Fewt”.
11 Catballou– First, thanks for an excellent laugh. I can just picture it. But next, am I reading that right? Your sister never visited again? She thought the point of your relationship was for her to lecture you on what you’re doing wrong? I guess that’s a big leap from the little you’ve told, but it sounds like it.
I can understand someone not understanding vibrators and getting the wrong idea. (I didn’t know and was glad when a boyfriend educated me.) I can almost understand older sisters lecturing younger ones. (I’m a younger sister, and while I find my older brother annoying a lot of the time, he’s not altogether a bad sort.) The part I can’t understand is cutting off visits after being stood up to. Maybe she was embarrassed at being caught in snooping?
Don’t know if someone mentioned this but, he needs to take a crap, not just have a shower. If he has shit sticking out of his ass, he needs to get it out, not just wash the outside. SO the shower is not going to resolve many of the problems this guy has. Yes tell him you like someone to be clean and tidy before having sex too. If it was my husband, I would assume this was a one time thing and wouldn’t say anything bc It would hurt his feelings. I would just stop 69ing immediately. BUT this was a boyfriend so savage’s comments are perfectly perfect.
@ 11, are all big sisters who are also the oldest siblings like this? I’ve grown up with one, known others, and already see this kind of presumptive behavior developing in my older daughter (also the first child). (Not that it’s a bad thing now, as I hope to be able to leave her in charge when she’s big enough, but I know it can go when all the kids are grown up and want her to be able to curb the tendency herself.)
I wish someone would ask Newt how the most repulsive human on the planet has still managed to get laid by multiple partners for his entire political career. I know that power is supposed to be an aphrodisiac, but geez! Ewwwww!
@54 I agree about the baby wipes. And having wiped my own kid’s bum, the distinctive smell of baby wipes is something I’ve come to associate with runny, smelly bowel movements. If I smelled baby wipes on a partner’s genital region, I’d probably gag. The woman just needs to talk to her boyfriend about his hygiene. She doesn’t have to coerce him into taking a shower with her. And besides, that wouldn’t take care of the “turtle head” problem. The guy apparently is just oblivious to the fact that he needs to clean himself better, and she needs to make him un-oblivious. God, I just can’t imagine not caring about my hygiene to the extent of letting a woman go down while I’ve literally got crap coming out my ass. Even when I was teenaged and stupid, I was self-conscious about how I looked and smelled to women, naked or clothed.
#4 (gromm) for the win …
“For the love of god, send a reporter to an interview. “
BUMP
Maybe ask some Santorums for some names & numbers of those gay friends while you’re at it.
There is no nice way of saying “your ass hole isn’t clean” so just sit him down and tell him, but not in a sexual context. Or just push baby wipes like they’re the second coming of christ. It works.
@ 57, idfriendly: Baby wipes are *THE* way to go! I’ve been usin’ them on me own bum for over ten years now.. How I (let alone anyone else) ever lived life up until the advent of the baby wipe! They’re cheap, effective and assure the utmost sanitary conditions for one’s tuchus!
;-D
+~+
Ms Erica – Maybe a straight virgin (I lack the experience to pronounce).
That, and it’s incredibly gross, not to mention mean and selfish, to expect anyone to wanna go near your junk when there’s a foul stench emanating from your trunk ;-D lol!
@ 61: Your name moves me… ;-)~ I’ll be your ‘V’enomenon;-D ;-+-; +~+
@ Anyone in here: Who wants to fuck;)?
As for the pre-marital woes of the Gs, that would have been an ideal topic for a Spouses Debate, which really ought to have been held already. They could have dressed up like characters from Dynasty.
This may have been pointed out already, but we already know the answer to the question of whether or not Newt asked for Callista’s approval for the “open marriage” he proposed to his second wife. According to Marriane Gingrich, Newt said “You want me all to yourself. Callista doesn’t care what I do.” So the devout catholic DID agree to and approve of the sinful, adulterous, non-monogamous ‘situation’ that Newt was proposing.
Come the bidet to America, please!
Wait. If both Newt and Callista are “devout Catholics,” then unless they had both of Newt’s former marriages annulled, they ain’t hitched–at least not in the eyes of the Catholic church, right? AM I RIGHT?
RE: Skanky holes. Straight men, and even some gay ones, can be notoriously awful about cleaning the bunghole. “That’s what underwear is for”, they cry.
Only the women who refuse to go down on stinky cocks, or play with messy buttholes have had any effect on this at all. I say Dan’s advice is right on- forget the hurt feelings. If he wants oral in that region, clean it up or get out of the game. Geez and gross!
@8- Could not agree more, but too funny!
The bidet is here already. Chk out the Toto Washlet. Seat Warmer, Warm Water Wash, Warm Blow Dry. Very Nice addition to anyones home.
@ 64, as well: No one’s answered that question yet, so I’ll ask again: who wants to get it on Right Now ;-)~ … Come on;) : You Know You Wanna ;-D+~+xxx+~+~+… I like it all; I love dancing and you look divine 😉 +~+ …….
@ 54, Indeed: To be honest, I misconstrued the main topic about the baby wipes: I get what you’re saying: if you’re gonna go and do it, *wash yo’ ass 1st!*. If you’re just home solo, it’s the middle of the dayb and all you’re doing is dropping a deuce, then *babywipes PLUS TP*… Shower optional if you feel especially skeeved-out despite one’s best efforts to sanitize and certify the back door area lol…
@68 The RCC will generally give you an automatic freebie annulment for any prior, non-RCC marriages as part of your conversion process/induction package. Callista was never married before, so she didn’t need one.
I’m surprised no one’s mentioned the virtues of enemas, and colon-cleansing..
“Going to ‘McDonald’s(tm)’ for a salad is going to a hooker for a hug!” ;-D Live quote from a friend and fellow comrade in the trenches of telemarketing lol..
Who in here drinks relatively-copious amounts of coffee? Who in here has exceptional Keigel-muscle control and can squeeze an amoeba out of your kiester?
Seriously though; open question:
I’ve never done anal: received or administered.
What’s The Best Way to clean out your insides, so you’ll have no mud on the prophylactic helmet?
I’ll douche with fucking ‘Massengill(tm)’ if I knew it would assure (pun intended lol) that hygenically I would be health-inspection passing on cleanliness and sanitary conditions?
All input welcome (relative pun, I suppose lol!)
Fuck me or fuck off LOL ;-D .
Pidgey: Like My Man Didgey! +~+
Nobody seems to have brought this up in reference to LW 1’s problem, but I doubt it was a turtle head poking out. It could be a hemmorroid or a skin tag, both are benign but probably not something the BF wants to discuss. Like everyone else says, a through shower would help with the aroma.
If Callista has always been such a devout Christian, then it must be okay to have sex with a married man for any devout christian woman. Not only once, but over the course of six years! So how devout was she really while she was fucking a married man ???
That scum bag !
Callista is Newt’s third wife; Marianne was his second. Jackie, Newt’s first wife, is the one who had cancer — not “riddled with cancer” and not “terminally ill” — in fact, she’s STILL ALIVE! ALIVE, get it?? Not passed on. Not bereft of life, resting in peace. Not kicked the bucket, not pushing up daisies, not shuffled off this mortal coil, not run down the curtain to join the choir invisible. Not even pinin’ for the fjords! She is not a “late” ex-wife! She is still among the living!
(Whew, hope I don’t have to repeat that yet again!)
Jackie Gingrich had a history of uterine cancer in the past, and at the time of the infamous hospital visit, she was recovering from surgery for a tumor which turned out to be benign. Newt did not ask Jackie for an open marriage (as far as we know) — he asked her for a divorce, as he was already having an affair with Marianne!
Callista doesn’t enter into the above scenario at all. Callista was Fourteen-Freakin’-Years-Old in 1980, when Newt & Jackie were divorced!
@73 — Callista didn’t need an annulment, but NEWT would (2 of ’em, actually), in order to be married in the RCC! Somehow I sorta doubt he got them.
Nuck Fewt, indeed.
@70 YES! Why do Americans not embrace the bidet? It solves all these problems.
@46 I thought it was acceptable to use gentle, not-quite-soap soapy stuff, like Dove.
Someone else posted that Newt would need two annulments to be made good in the eyes of the RCC.
I am not up on the current RCC rules. How can Callista, let alone Newt, be considered in good standing (able to receive the sacraments?). Do they both get a pass because neither of his first 2 marriage vows were in the Church (although perhaps made in other denominations’ buildings)?
[How come Protestant churces give the RCC a pass on this non-recognition of non-Cath marriages, anyway? Seems like it would be a major source of contention. But Religion has always been about hypocrisy and expediency, I guess.]
If Newt would need annulments, then his and Callista’s marriage isn’t Catholicly legit, is it? Besides that, how do they make good on six years of breaking a commandment? Did some of that Tiffany account pay for Papal jewelry to get special dispensations?
In some cultures they clean themselves before sex.
@41(Crinoline), that’s an interesting point. I suppose the point is that, if someone does indeed go through the sin-repentance-redemption cycle, that would be OK. But did Mr Gingrich? What exactly is it about Callista that makes it more likely he has now finally really seen the light?
Besides… Mr Gingrich was already a family-values conservative politician before meeting Callista. If he only became redeemed after meeting her, does this mean he was lying then?
I suppose, from a religious conservative mindset, the difference between a repent-and-redeem conservative like Gingrich and Democrats like Wiener is simply that the former did repent, while the latter didn’t. Come to think of it, I imagine the reason they are quite anti-liberal is that the liberals are those sinners who didn’t repent, while the conservatives are those who did. Interesting.
@AFinch, who wrote:
But that is flat-out contradictory; they couldn’t believe that with a straight face. To make things non-contradictory, they would have to believe in some version of the theory that Mr Gingrich has redeemed itself with Callista’s help and will no longer stray.
I do agree that conservatives think that fighting “the liberal threat” is even more important than sex control (this can be done after the liberals are gone), which is why the anybody-but-Romney movement gets traction: believing Mr Gingrich implies less is at stake than believing Mr Romney. If Mr Gingrich turns out to still be a philanderer, he can still repent and be brought to reason; but if Mr Romney turns out to be a closet liberal on at least some of the issues, that will be much harder to fix.
@79 “How come Protestant churces give the RCC a pass on this non-recognition of non-Cath marriages, anyway?”
Because we have Separation of Church and State. That means, among other things, that religious organizations are answerable to the state, not to other religious organizations. (The theology of the Catholic Church is none of the Protestant Churches’ business, in exactly the same way that the sex life of my neighbours is none of my business.) If you have a country where some religious organizations have power over other religious organizations, that country doesn’t practice Separation of Church and State.
BTW, Protestant churches not giving the RCC a pass on stuff has been tried. Google the Thirty Years’ War (for just one example). Separation of Church and State works a LOT better.
The virgin’s boyfriend might be a virgin himself. Or maybe he suspects the boyfriend is a virgin. I would guess the latter.
Mentioning hygiene (or any other requests) is just fine, but it should be mentioned later. As in “Honey, I really liked the 69 we did the other night, it was great, but I have a little request; can you please clean your privates, including your ass for me please, just to make them extra fresh, so I’ll enjoy it even more”. Just about any guy would love to hear those words. And if the don’t, then don’t go down.
erm…”devout catholic mistress” is an oxymoron
Callista Gingrich is simply a moron.
35 and the advice to MITM– It’s not just that Dan is compassionate except when it comes to bodily fluids he doesn’t like. I quite agree with him there. It’s that he sometimes has the idea that good relationships and good sexual relationships are so common that if there’s something wrong with the first, you just find another in a few days.
This young woman (I’m assuming woman because of the tone. I’m assuming young because she doesn’t seem to be out of the two-word language developmental phase.) loves the man to pieces and says she loves the sex. If she yells at him while running for her car, she solves the hygiene problem (never has to face that again) but not the one about finding another boyfriend she likes so well.
She cares about this guy enough not to want to humiliate him. She doesn’t know that if he’s clueless enough in the first place not to wash, he’s probably clueless enough not to care when he’s told to wash. So she can be as direct as necessary right on up to the point of being so harsh that he hates her. My sexy shower idea may have been unnecessarily oblique (I did say it was for someone who wasn’t terribly assertive), but it’s safe if she doesn’t want to make him angry or hurt.
@77 – My information is perhaps somewhat dated, but I doubt the cannon law has changed. 22 years ago I married a divorced Catholic convert. I never converted, and she did not expect to ever remarry at the time of her conversion. I am (nominally) an Episcopal; she had been raised one and had been married in the Episcopal church.
We (she) sought to get the blessing of the RCC when we married, and they indicated that she might need an annulment, but said that if required, it would be pro-forma since her first marriage was not recognized by the RCC – they do not recognize non-RCC marriages. Moreover, the administrative cannon law paves the way for new converts, particularly given the RCC’s dropping world-wide numbers. To wit: the married Anglican priests being ordained. I was given the impression by two parish priests that ordinarily annulments were requested and granted for already divorced people as part of their conversion process.
I was pressured to convert as a two-fer, but refused and our most significant issue was this – having a Catholic priest perform the ceremony in my Episcopal church alongside an Episcopal priest. It was not the annulment.
I am an insignificant nobody; I leave it to your analysis to reflect on what kind of barrier existed for a powerful Southern Baptist making the same conversion.
@83
Since when is cognitive (rational/logical) dissonance not a prerequisite for conservatism, much less fundamentalism? Sorry for the snark, but this is a sophmoric objection to the obvious issue. Of course you are right and they are entirely contradictory, but insisting their nuts doesn’t illuminate how to deal with them! 🙂
Old Crow is exactly right about how the RCC sees it spiritually or morally, though they don’t really care about separation of Church and state; they care only about their own ‘theology’ (reality, and ontological definitions) and strive to push the state to conform.
My embarrassing bad: “they’re” not “their”. Oy the shame.
#75 may be right-what if it’s a hemorrhoid? Which leads to a separate question: what is the sex protocol for people with hemorrhoids (but normal to great hygiene)? Is it gross? Do you say anything? Is anal play off the table? Is it gross to have anal sex with a partner with hemorrhoids? Should they treat them/have them surgically removed if they want to engage in anal? I imagine it’s unappealing visually.
Also, always shower before sex. If you can’t shower, use a wet wash cloth or a wipe.
@91 “always shower before sex”
Why? I love climbing on top of him in the morning, both of us barely awake….
And then there’s the time in the parking garage. I didn’t see any showers handy, I have to say.
Did I miss a new entry in the lexicon? No one else mentioned Dan’s use of the word “holesome”. I think that this new spelling and usage could be interesting, but I feel that it would still be misplaced in this context.
I figure he really meant “wholesome”, but in Calista’s case “whoresome” may be a better adjective.
As for the larger story, I don’t think that the Republican party needs our help. They are doing a good job self-destructing on their own. In what should have been a pretty-much-slam-dunk to dethrone a sitting president (against my wishes) they clearly appear to most not as a party, but instead as a circus made up only of clowns.
Maybe we shouldn’t gloat so much, the American voters may still show how incredibly stupid they are by electing one of these morons.
@93 – No, Dan knows his words well enough to have fun playing with them. I think he meant to sound like he was saying ‘wholesome’ while making up a new word meaning ‘all-orifice spooge-bucket’.
Toilet paper or baby wipes by themselves are useless for cleaning your ass. You are mostly just smearing shit around. You need water (bidet, bottle, shower) to finish it off and actually get clean down there. Try it, you’ll never go back.
How is water from bidet, etc. + TP different from using pre-moistened baby wipes?? Water alone, unless it is soapy water in a very strong stream isn’t going to remove much, let alone all.
An expensive bidet installation probably does = less TP use. I just can’t afford to have one installed everywhere I, uhm, go.
I use unscented moistened baby wipes all the time (buy in bulk at disc store) and they clean much more thoroughly than dry TP. Plus – guess what? They come also in portable packs.
Guys without handbags? Tsk. Tsk. Maybe a zip lock bag to carry a few in a pocket?
@84. I think you misunderstood my question.
I know Prots and Caths in history used to be at each other’s throats. DUH! And that for legal standing marriages have to be licensed by the state. I also totally support separation of church and state. Would prefer no church at all, actually, but an atheist is nothing if not a realist.
I was just wondering why the Protestants aren’t really offended that the RCC actively discounts Prot. religious marriage ceremonies as legit within RCC dogma? Perhaps not as rigidly as they used to, but that was part of my question.
I was raised Catholic so I am less familiar with the mindset of the various mainstream Protestant sects on this issue. Possibly they reciprocate by considering a divorced Catholic person to be never married in their god’s eyes when he/she decides to marry one of theirs? But I never heard of them requiring a Non-Protestant mother to agree to raise her kids Protestant before they would sanction the marriage. Which is what the Catholics did to my Mom.
I get that they are all acting united now under the Xtian umbrella against the rational, progressive movement. If the majority, radical conservatives ever take real control of this country, the eventual conflicts among the American Christian factions will make the 30 Years War look like a cake walk.
Everything they do is based upon fear, power-mongering and expediency, not morality.
@87 (Crinoline), you’re indeed right that Dan often writes as if getting out of a relationship and finding a new, better one were indeed easy. But there are other topics about which he is not so quick to push the eject button, about which he can be quite compassionate and take the time to evaluate the big picture. This one isn’t, alas, one of them. Note that, even though most people would agree with Dan (and you) on the topic (certain, but not other, bodily fluids — I don’t think Dan would be so quick to feel revolted if the fluid in question were, say, semen), not everybody does (I, for one, don’t).
(Be it said, though, that Dan has evolved more and more towards compassionate advising as time went by. When you compare his current columns to the first ones in his archive over a decade ago, you can notice a difference not only in preferred topics — from how-to sex advice to what-do-I-do-now relationship and ethical advice — but also in tone.)
@92, indeed, comparable situations are known to me, as well… Long live pheromones. 🙂
Regarding anal hygiene: google “showershot” – It can be installed in any shower and is very convenient for making sure that one is prepared for sex.
Address the problem directly – When my ex questioned why I avoided “that” area, I told him I how I prepared for sex and said he needed to do the same. It was that simple.
More on the MITM question– When I was in cooking school, the management teacher asked us how we would handle a dishwasher with a body odor. The hypothetical question involved a good reliable worker with bad hygiene. My classmates and I were all in our early 20s. We hemmed and hawed and got embarrassed. Most of us thought we’d fire him and hire someone else, but we’d already been learning about how expensive it is to find and train workers. Those of us who were willing to hazard an answer started with telling him what we’d been drilled on about the importance of cleanliness to food safety.
The teacher’s answer was so brilliant I remember it now and have applied it to many situations. You don’t concentrate on the problem. You get specific about the solution. Instead of telling a man that he smells bad, you explain that you’re changing his break to mid day and issuing him a second uniform. You give him information on how you want him to go to the men’s room during his break and wash there. Also, you’ve bought particular deodorant products that you want him to use and so on. She said it so naturally that we could imagine a woman speaking to a man and doing some good.
It sounds like an exaggeration, but that bit of information may have changed my life. I started noticing how often I assumed people didn’t know about a problem when the chances were good they didn’t know the solution. It applies everywhere, but I especially think of parents and teachers trying to help students in school. I remember being told over and over what awful things would happen if I didn’t study more, raise my grades and learn the material. It was all about motivation, little about actual teaching.
Turtlehead?
Unless scat is your thing…why wouldn’t someone finish before bed?
What in the hell?
@ Anyone In Here: Love Is Love. If Someone Is Truly Happy With Someone Else, & They’re Both Virgins, Then Who Gives A Shiat? ;-D They Can Have Fun Not Being Virgins Anymore Together 🙂 +~+
To The Wild Sow:
What are you trying to say, man?! That Mrs. Newt #1 is STILL ALIVE ;-D lol…
Gotcha.
😉