Savage Love

1. Re: the foot fetishist:

   The thing about uneven sexual urges between couples is that things tend to default on the LOWER side: i.e. if one person wants sex all the time and the other rarely wants it, the couple will RARELY have sex. If one person wants foot worship and the other doesn’t, the couple just won’t incorporate footplay into their sex life.

   So basically, the more prudish/less sexual person gets everything THEY want while the other person goes unfulfilled. And how is that fair? Plus, the original letter made it sound as though this girl flat-out REFUSED to even try to indulge her boy. No reason, no discussion, just “Yeah…I know this act is an integral part of sex for you, but you’ll have to do without it.”

   And for those people who say “Well, he needs to grow up and put his silly fetish aside for the sake of his great relationship”: 1) you clearly have no fetishes and have NO idea what it’s like. For me – and many others – kink is an integral part of sex. Imagine finding a partner who’s emotionally compatible with you and will do any sex act you want EXCEPT KISSING ON THE MOUTH. That’s right: no kissing, ever. Sound a little unfulfilling? Maybe a bit of an intimacy-killer? Now you know how I feel when some boy railroads me into being vanilla. 2) Is it a “great” relationship when your partner won’t even TRY to give you what you need?

2. …and why do so many people think that being an adult inherently means giving up all the things you like, anyway? That’s just…sad.

   Yeah, growing up means being responsible, keeping your promises, etc. It should NOT mean putting aside fundamental parts of your personality. It should NOT mean “settling down” with someone who doesn’t fulfill you just because society says everyone is supposed to settle down. Dammit.

3. @46: I can’t comment on the position in the US, as I’m down in Australia. We have laws against “actual or simulated representations” of children in a sexualized context. When the law came in, a number of lawyers opined publicly that written representation was a matter of interpretation of the law, and it will be up to test cases over whether you could be thrown in jail for writing/reading it. AFAIK the law hasn’t been tested to that extent. I believe, even when it comes to images, we have some kind of line between “art/reporting/just-a-photo” and “sexualized”, so Lolita is fine, but something written primary to titillate may fall foul of the law.

   This whole issue came up big-time in the LiveJournal community some time ago, and people dug up examples in some parts of the world of people being charged and found guilty of writing about under-age sex.

   Dan’s mentioned before that his letters don’t come exclusively from the US. Thus, “check your local laws”.

   Regarding queer, maybe it’s a geographic/community thing, but I’ve definitely heard the BDSM community referred to as ‘queer’. I understand that the LGBT community has “re-claimed” the term, and people may assume that usage, particularly in a sexual context.

4. While we are on the subject of kink… is there a word for someone whose fetish is fetishes?
   I don’t have any kinks of my own, and I can find vanilla sex perfectly fun and enjoyable, but nothing turns me on more than a guy I am with saying, “Hey, I know this is crazy, but would you mind…?” I just like kinky guys, and it really doesn’t matter what the kink is. Is this common?

5. Tangential question: why does LW #2 care so much who his friend dates or doesn’t, that he actually writes to Savage Love about it? Dude, get a life.

6. Um, Dan, news flash: for 20- to 30-somethings in relatively liberal urban areas (like Seattle), “traditional values” means “waiting more than three dates for sex,” or more generally, “not having sex with anyone you’re not in a committed (monogamous) relationship with.” Most of my friends are married or engaged, and all of them cohabited before getting engaged. I consider this normal, and I wouldn’t want to get married to a woman I hadn’t lived with for at least a few months (and had sex with, obviously) – but I wouldn’t touch a married woman either, or one who was still technically in any kind of relationship. This doesn’t make me gay, it’s simply “conservative” (meaning “cautious”, not “right-wing nutjob”), and, for me at least, it’s just common sense – I create enough stupid drama for myself already without getting involved in other couples’ messy personal lives.

7. One thing nobody has mentioned —

   Personally, I have no problem with foot fetishes and don’t find them gross, and I enjoy rubbing my SO’s feet. Unfortunately, my own feet are so ticklish that any extended touching of them makes me hyperventilate. A partner tried to suck my toes one time and, um, I involuntarily kicked her in the face. >_> I’m not proud of that.

   So there are totally valid reasons for being unwilling to play along with a foot fetish. Of course, if the guy just wanted to buy me sexy shoes and parade me around in them, I’d be totally okay with that. 😀

8. Dan, you’re kind of a dick sometimes who writes things more for entertainment value and your own personal vendettas than for trying to help people out. Ok. All the time.

9. Yeah, what #26 said.
   DIS is so concerned about this situation that has zero to do with him that he wrote to Dan?

   And I also agree that it is possible that his friend (assuming there is such a friend) simply isn’t all that into women who can’t quite finish one relationship before chasing down the next one. It’s not the overwhelming response from most males, but yes, there are guys out there who find that unappealing.

10. What is “not too much to ask” for one person is entirely too much to ask for another. And I personally know a small handful of people out of my circle of friends who find the mere concept of anyone doing anything with their feet revolting, and is right next to being asked to fuck a dead deer carcass. I think Dan forgets that just because it’s common and/or benign sounding doesn’t mean that it’s not disgusting to just as many people. Respect for wanting to do X and respect for not wanting to do X should be equal.

11. I would like to fuck married women exclusively. I have traditional values…married women fuck the best!

    Pamela River–quit plugging your shitty blog!

12. @62: Fair point about equal respect for wanting to vs NOT wanting to. The problem is that often a person doesn’t “REALLY NOT want to do X”, they just don’t really want to do X because it’s effort with little reward as they see it. X doesn’t disgust them, but it doesn’t do it for them either, and so the person is acting selfishly by refusing (assuming their partner isn’t similarly selfish, in which case they deserve each other).

    Let’s divide it into three:
    1. Likes the idea of X
    2. Doesn’t particularly like or dislike X
    3. Is repelled by X

    1 and 3 deserve equal ‘respect’. People sitting at 2 who pretend to be 3 to get out of making the effort for their lover deserve DTMFA status.

    Commence wild speculation:
    I suspect Dan leans towards assuming 2 over 3 because he sees so much HONEST not-making-the-effort (“I’m a 3 on this one but I still won’t do it for you”) that he thinks it’s a safe assumption that there’s also lots of DISHONEST not-making-the-effort.

13. I vote for premarital sex being a traditional value.

    Long story, but I was a good girl and I was going to stay a good girl until I got married.
    Almost made it too. Did it with him a month before we were married. We had been engaged for five month, big wedding in final plans.
    Too late for him to back out.

    I wish he had.

    Now I’m a single mom, and my oldest is 14.

    I don’t want her to be a virgin on her wedding night. When she’s an adult, I want her to have premarital sex.
    I want her to marry for love.
    I don’t want her to get married to a guy who will marry her because he can’t get into her pants any other way.

14. Queer means that I don’t need to identify. Labels are only useful if they are soft and absorbant and don’t clog the plumbing. Queer is an un-label: a means of establishing solidarity without having to exactly where you stand on the slot and tab issues that are so interesting to straights (homos and hetros included..).

15. “without having to SAY exactly”…oops..

16. @39, 55, 66 – the core point I wanted to make about “queer” in response to a much earlier comment is that people who identify as queer and people who identify as kinky both DO and DON’T overlap. Folks who identify as queer should not be assumed to be into non-vanilla sex; folks who identify as kinky should not be assumed to be non-straight. I generally use queer the way 66 does.

    @39, I could say you’re queer because of your interests in people with a non-heteronormative gender expression, and I could say you’re kinky because their gender expression difference presents as a fetish as opposed to an identity. But at the end of the day, you alone have the right to label or NOT label yourself how you see fit, and as for me, I would indeed just call you lucky. 🙂

17. DIS’s friend doesn’t seem gay. I would run for the hills, too, if a married co-worker reveals they haven’t had sex for a year. Nothing worse than a horny co-worker that likes to share that information. And doesn’t mind this information being shared with the universe.

    This woman is doing the pursuing. Most woman don’t do that kind of thing. Unless this DIS is very wealthy.

    This is improbable but maybe DIS is being ‘played’. Maybe she’s got her ‘soon to be ex-husband’s’ permission to start a relationship so they can take his money.

    I’ve heard of this type of thing happening. Not saying this is what’s going on with DIS but it would be wise of him to be on his guard.

18. I just listened to the last podcast (before today) and had to comment on the reply to the question about guys “adjusting” themselves. It has NOTHING to do with underwear type or size of the apendage! It has to do with the macho “I’ve got a penis, too!” attitude. If you will notice, this behavior seems to be a lot more prevalent in the hip-hop crowd. It’s like they have to constantly reassure themselves that it’s still there, especially when in a group of other men. I am a gay man, I’m generously endowed and I wear tight-whitey’s, and I rarely need to “adjust”. It seems me that it has become more of a habit than anything to a lot of guys. It’s really gross, too, I must agree.

19. Letter 1: Are we really sure “queer lady” is female? Plenty of effeminate gay males refer to themselves and others as ladies. No rule that only women can fantasize about underage girls with older men.

    Letter 2: I don’t give a rip about self-described “traditional values” or the dangers of rebounds. Adults can label themselves any way they want and choose whether or not to take emotional risks. But as to getting involved with someone in the “process of separating,” as a divorce lawyer I can say with some authority that when either party to a divorce gets involved with someone else prior to BOTH spouses being completely emotionally separated, it often makes the divorce much more difficult, expensive and stressful to everybody, including the spouses, their friends, family and lovers. Also, people going through the divorce process, until they have dealt with all the associated emotional issues, are prone to make dubious personal decisions that effect themselves and others.

20. Letter 1: Are we really sure “queer lady” is female? Plenty of effeminate gay males refer to themselves and others as ladies. No rule that only women can fantasize about underage girls with older men.

    Letter 2: I don’t give a rip about self-described “traditional values” or the dangers of rebounds. Adults can label themselves any way they want and choose whether or not to take emotional risks. But as to getting involved with someone in the “process of separating,” as a divorce lawyer I can say with some authority that when either party to a divorce gets involved with someone else prior to BOTH spouses being completely emotionally separated, it often makes the divorce much more difficult, expensive and stressful to everybody, including the spouses, their friends, family and lovers. Also, people going through the divorce process, until they have dealt with all the associated emotional issues, are prone to make dubious personal decisions that effect themselves and others.

21. Letter 1: Are we really sure “queer lady” is female? Plenty of effeminate gay males refer to themselves and others as ladies. No rule that only women can fantasize about underage girls with older men.

    Letter 2: I don’t give a rip about self-described “traditional values” or the dangers of rebounds. Adults can label themselves any way they want and choose whether or not to take emotional risks. But as to getting involved with someone in the “process of separating,” as a divorce lawyer I can say with some authority that when either party to a divorce gets involved with someone else prior to BOTH spouses being completely emotionally separated, it often makes the divorce much more difficult, expensive and stressful to everybody, including the spouses, their friends, family and lovers. Also, people going through the divorce process, until they have dealt with all the associated emotional issues, are prone to make dubious personal decisions that effect themselves and others.

22. AAARRRG!
    I have no idea why my comment just posted 3x. Sorry. Hope someone can delete a couple of them.

23. Has an arbiter been appointed who gets to decide what “traditional” means? Whose traditions will that person canonize? The traditions of the LGBT community? The traditions of the Vatican? The traditions of the Inuits?

24. @ #46 — in Canada that would definitely be considered obscenity.

25. Regarding 46’s “the Supreme Court even protects the production and possession of sexual depictions of children that are made digitally, so long as no actual children were involved in the production” from an Australian perspective:

    Australia bans any simulated images of children in a sexual context (treating it identically under the law to actual child pornography), arguing that the simulated stuff will lead some people to produce actual stuff for the more hard-core consumers (and various similar arguments), thus leading to child abuse. The flip side is that the simulated stuff may help to satisfy some of the demand, meaning there is LESS demand for the actual stuff and thus, fewer children abused.

    On the face of it (to me), both arguments have their merits, and I leave it to those with more information than me to be the arbiters. I guess the US’s arbiters disagreed with Australia’s, or else they agreed but that double-edged constitution over-ruled them.

26. @70:

    I agree. And I’m sick of women who flaunt their boobs all the time, with plunging decolletages. Especially on FOXNoise!

27. PGofHSM protection of free speech continues to remain in flux in the United States when it comes to depictions of child pronography, even when it comes to those that don’t involve actual children (exempli gratia, literature, drawings or renders using Poser, Make Human or any of a number of other rendering engines for creating figure art). While the US Supreme Court dismissed the CPPA of 1996, this led to a surge of child porn photography digitally rendered to appear as artwork and US Congress responded by adding restrictions to the PROTECT Act of 2003.

    Sadly, this led to the persecution of aficionados of extreme art, including Christopher Handley, a manga enthusiast of whose massive collection a small percentage was hentai, and of that segment, a small percentage was lolicon (for which there is a huge market in, and output from Japan). The court case was highly politicized and thanks in some part to some poor procedural maneuverings and despite efforts from the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, Handley is serving fifteen years for the art in his collection.

    This has set a precedent that possession of any depiction of underage sex, including a scene in Neil Gaiman’s Sandman sequence Doll’s House and the entirety of Lost Girls by Allan Moore may be subject to jail time. More recent news seems to imply things are getting worse.

28. Crap. I hit the wrong button.

    Pornography. Pronogaphy is something else, but I don’t know what.

29. @79, or whomever – if the erotica in question depicts AGE PLAY (which is what FLAP was reading), not child pornography, how could it possibly be illegal? there is an enormous difference between scenes of adults being treated like children or teens and actual scenes featuring children or teens, is there not? age play porn is not child pornography.

30. whateverwhatever, the fiction to which FLAP was referring featured, diegetically, underage girls with older men which constitutes literary porn that involves minors. you’re right about this being out of the jurisdiction of the PROTECT Act of 2003.

    I do know that through the late ’90s literary porn featuring minors could not be published. But this doesn’t prevent it from being written and distributed freely (and rampantly) over the internet. I also don’t know that this has changed or was even addressed by ACLU v. Ashcroft, 2002

    But my previous post was addressing PGofHSM‘s comments about digital creations being protected as free speech. They should be but aren’t.

    As an occasional age-player, myself I agree with you that there’s a vast difference between those who roleplay pedophilic situations and those who seek to sexually assault children. I’d also go as far as differentiating:

    ~ pedophilia vs. ephebophilia (the latter being an interest in post-pubescent minors i.e. breedable teens, and not regarded as a paraphilia)
    ~ child fetishism (i.e. lolicon consumption) vs. clinical pedophilia as defined by the DSM IV vs. child sexual abuse.
    ~ art that should be protected by free speech, vs. media the production of which involves the abuse of minors.

    Many segments of our society, including the media and the law, sometimes have difficulty telling these things apart.

    And I tend to jump onto soapboxes about it.

31. #53, perverse cowgirl, what’s your kink? Oh, please tell me!

32. #70,

    Saying comfort has NOTHING to do with it is a pretty big assumption for one man to make simply because he doesn’t do it and has a seems to have a hard-on, figuratively speaking, for hating the behavior.

    I wear boxers and am averagely sized, my buddy wears boxer briefs and is a tripod. We both occasionally have to adjust for similar reasons. Sometimes, when getting an erection at watching that cute redheaded girl in the mall, or thinking about that cute redheaded girl, or because your body is bored and just felt like it, things get a little tight and a bit of pants-Tetris needs to be done to shunt the little (or medium, or big) bugger down one side or the other of those infernal bifurcated leg coverings mainstream society still wants us men to wear (Ah sarongs…fashionable and comfy…).

    Another reason is when I wear a particularly loose set of boxers, or should my friends third leg try to occupy the same sleeve of his boxer-briefs as one of his more standard limbs, the skin of the penis can kind of stick to the skin of the inner thigh, and that just feels kind of weird. You just have to separate them like two rowdy kids on a playground.

    There see? Possibilities beyond hip-hop inspired machismo do exist. Fantastic!

33. I really love your responses to this week’s questions. I 100% agree with what you said to #1 and #2.

34. @65 : agreed, only… I vote for premarital mind-blowing sex.

    Girls need to know that dull sex is not the only kind of sex available, and that they don’t have to settle with mediocrity. Young males are seldom good lovers, and some have no interest in learning how to pleasure their partner – as long as they get laid.

    I had premarital sex all right, with several boyfriends. Then I married. And for 10 years, I was a wife “with a low sex-drive”. I felt very guilty. He would initiate sex and I would have no envy whatsoever, but I would do it at least once a month to keep him happy. He complained that I didn’t seem to enjoy it, so it was less fun for him. He told me I was frigid. He cheated on me, then we divorced.

    Then I met a man whom I thought would just be a fling. The first sexual encounter, he touched me and licked me all over and I had the first orgasm of my life at 35 – without penetration. Guess what, with a good partner, I too do get an orgasm !

    Of course, the jerk of an ex would never go down on me (woman genitals, yuck), it was always down to his routine of “No preliminaries, I penetrate, I pound, I ejaculate, did you like it ? You must be frigid, I loved it !”

    Now I’m having loads of fire-hot sex with my beloved rebound (thanks for showing us some love Dan), including oral each and every time, for both – and it’s been going on for more than a year.

    I really pity the poor girl that now beds the jerk.

35. Getting REAL annoying. Are you getting, Dan, that no one wants to wait all week for your new column only to find out that 1/3 of it is old news? It seems you are getting lazy and taking the easy way out, and frankly it’s insulting to your dedicated, regular fans. You are punishing loyalty and rewarding the occasional asshole that stumbles across your column but has never read your blog before. If you think your readers love you so much that they won’t turn fickle, think again… better put some effort in.

36. Getting REAL annoying. Are you getting, Dan, that no one wants to wait all week for your new column only to find out that 1/3 of it is old news? It seems you are getting lazy and taking the easy way out, and frankly it’s insulting to your dedicated, regular fans. You are punishing loyalty and rewarding the occasional asshole that stumbles across your column but has never read your blog before. If you think your readers love you so much that they won’t turn fickle, think again… better put some effort in.

37. In fact… just realized I didn’t even finish this one. As soon as I hit the repeat, I jumped down here to express my extreme annoyance. Now I’m off to watch a movie and drink a beer.

38. @21: Wrong. Smart would be adding a FOURTH letter to the end with a teaser about his blog, saying it came from there. What he’s doing is just plain fucking irritating.

39. 86/sissoucat: I had premarital sex all right, with several boyfriends. Then I married. And for 10 years, I was a wife “with a low sex-drive”. . . He told me I was frigid. He cheated on me, then we divorced.

    Of course, the jerk of an ex would never go down on me (woman genitals, yuck), it was always down to his routine of “No preliminaries, I penetrate, I pound, I ejaculate, did you like it ? You must be frigid, I loved it !”

    I’m glad you’re no longer with your ex and are now with a guy who loves to please you but, out of curiosity, why did you marry this guy in the first place when he sounds so sexually selfish? You said that you had premarital sex with several boyfriends…was he not one of them?

40. I wish those of you who don’t care for how Dan recycles letters would write directly to him about it, instead of boring the rest of us repeatedly in the comments section. Dan reads his e-mail regularly. These comments, not so much, if at all.

41. @92: If you’re bored, no one is putting a gun to your head and making you read them. And if you listened to his podcasts you’d know that he does read the comment section.

42. @56 Fannerz- I don’t know the name for a “fetish fetish”, but I have it too! I mean, I have a few favorites I like to try out regulary, but my biggest fetish is other fetishists. One thing I cant stand is a partner with no fetish of their own (good thing my husband is kinky, yes?). I love those magic words of “well, don’t laugh, but would you be willing to…?” Someone should come up with a name for us…
    About DIS- there could be tons of reasons both of them aren’t into this chick. Maybe DIS isn’t chasing down the girl for himself is 1) She’s only into his friend, not him 2) DIS is married, partnered, etc (I don’t think it stated that the letter writer was single- just that the friend was) or ever 3) the letter writer (DIS) isn’t interested in women, but the friend is. His friend might be gay (Dan and his wishfull thinking… *grin*), or he might be trying to avoid drama. Or he might be using the drama as an easy to explain reason when she’s realy just not his type. Or he thinks she’s too agressive. Or he doesn’t date coworkers. Or hes after someone else already. Or he saw her with something gross in her teeth once and now he can’t get the image out of his head….. could be anything. *grin*

43. Yech- bad typo day. Sorry all- hard to type with a kitten on my lap…

44. If the ‘co-worker with traditional values’ sounds like a blind, I notice that Dan saw through it, did not give a whatever, and answered it well and added a bit of his own POV on larger issues of sexual honesty. I thought he aced it and made excellent use of it as received.

    And we have lots of fiction in our lives. Some of us publish it, some do not, some sign it with their real names, some make up ‘good friends’ to do their living for them. That’s human diversity.

    http://www.darkroastpress.com

45. Dan—-as always, I live for your column!

    All the best in your ERW fund raiser at the Paramount!

46. Reading the comments here about foot fetishes gives me hope. Everyone is supportive and nonchalant about it. I can see how one might be repulsed by foot worship, but fuck it – I just have to accept me for who I am. A guy who likes women’s feet.

47. @91 : Yes, I had 2 years of premarital sex with my husband, and it felt just like it did with the previous boyfriends : quite dull and boring. So why not marry him ? He wasn’t any more “sexually selfish” (as you rightly put it) than the other ones.

    What I meant is, girls deserve pleasure in sex, they need to be educated into getting pleasure or ditching the guy.

    Because most of the friends’ husbands I’ve been told of *are* that sexually selfish. And both husbands and wives find it quite normal : men want sex, women are bored by sex. Maybe there was some foreplay in the first years of marriage, one or two orgasms, but it’s been a long time ago, and nowadays it’s down to only penetration and ejaculation.

    The only thing I knew about what was sex was from friends (contraception was told in school, thankfully) : I was expected to feel pleasure out of penetration, and if I really loved the guy I was to give him a blowjob, and end up with semen in my mouth, which wouldn’t taste good, and he would really love that.

    Since I had not felt more than a light pleasure from my several experiences of premarital sex, that were always penetration and ejaculation without foreplay, I surmised I was the defective one. No reason not to get married, right ? As long as the other party knew about it and wasn’t deterred by my “defect”.

    And I actually felt thankfull for the jerk, who had accepted to live with an asexual woman like me, and make an honest married woman out of me.

    I had heard of receiving a cunilingus as something even more degrading for a woman, than having to give a blowjob to a man. Thanks, prudes ! The old saying “a woman who enjoys sex is a whore” is not that far away in my country : France. Yep, you read it well.

    So thanks Dan ! You made my sexual life happen !

48. @91 : I felt of “lower sexual quality” than my female friends because they had experienced at least some orgasms in premarital sex, while I had not, ever.

49. @98 : my first orgasm was from having my toes sucked. Feet fetishists rule !

50. Anyone who would refer to herself as “a queer lady” is no lady.

Comments are closed.