My boss/CEO lives and works in a different city, but most of her mail arrives at my office because it is the company’s official address. I routinely open mail and packages addressed to her. Usually they contain documents for me to handle or software for me to install, but today I opened a package with her name on it to find something completely different: a pair of vibrating panties.

Both the billing address and shipping address are the same, so I’m guessing she purchased them on her company card.

I know this is more of a business-etiquette question, but do your amazing sex-advice skills provide you with any ideas on how I should handle this? It will be very obvious that the package has been opened, even if I try to tape it back up and send it to her home address. But if I do nothing, sooner or later she’s going to wonder where her shipment is.

We’re a small, casual company and she’s a pretty confident and outgoing person, but I can’t really predict how she will react to this. Would it be weird for me to just be up-front about this situation? Should I just throw in a sticky note that says, “Whoops! Have fun! ;-)” And send it on? Or should I pretend this embarrassing thing never happened?

Avoid the Awkward

Emoticons are never the right answer, ATA. Please make an emoticon-free note of it.

Now here’s what my amazing sex-advice Spidey sense is telling me: Vibrating panties are not a sex toy, ATA, they’re a gag gift. Check your boss’s schedule: Any bridal showers coming up? Bachelorette parties? A friend holding a bash to mourn/celebrate a recent divorce?

There’s a small chance that your boss doesn’t know much about sex toys and purchased a pair of vibrating panties for herself and intends to wear them on long flights (if she can get them past security). But you should nevertheless treat this pair of panties like a misplaced gag gift, ATA, and not an existential workplace crisis. So no notes, no emoticons, no being “up-front about this situation,” ATA, because this isn’t a “situation.” It’s a shipping error.

Tape up the box and send it off to your boss and forget about it. If she feels a need to bring it up—if she wants to apologize or let you know it was, in fact, a gag gift—she will.

Yesterday I was finishing a work conversation with my boss via instant message from my home computer. I meant to send her a legitimate link, but because I used the wrong combination of keys, I accidentally entered a several-day-old porn link that was still in the memory and hit send before I noticed my mistake. I’m a 30-year-old male, my boss is a few years younger and female, and she’s generally cool. Once I realized what I had done, I immediately told her not to click the link and I sent the right one. The URL left little to the imagination about what kind of link it was.

We work in a very professional environment that’s careful about maintaining a respectful and harassment-free workplace. I’m horribly embarrassed. How should I handle it? I’m inclined to never speak of it again unless she does first.

Jerk From Home

Workplace power dynamics being what they are—bosses can fire employees, employees can’t fire bosses—you do need to put something in writing.

First, no emoticons.

Second, send a brief e-mail to your boss detailing just how that happened—IMing from your home computer, not your work computer (making it clear that you weren’t looking at porn on your work computer without using the word “porn”)—apologize one more time, and state that you’ll take care that it doesn’t happen again. You could still get in trouble with HR if your boss decides to make a case of it, but you’ll be able to point to a contemporaneous e-mail that details your side of the story, i.e., an accident, you weren’t rubbing one out in front of a work computer.

In somewhat related news: Today I sent my straight boss a picture I found online of a guy with a wine bottle stuffed up his ass—I did it on purpose. 😉

I wanted to thank you for drawing so much attention to Sex at Dawn. I am going to get it as soon as possible so I can better understand myself. I have always felt a certain amount of shame because I’ve never had a monogamous relationship. Having been married 14 years (married at 19, which I know is a no-no in your book), I’ve had plenty of temptation and only given in a few times. Those events felt like they were saving my sanity; they never had anything to do with me loving my husband any less. It wasn’t until I started listening to your advice that I realized that maybe I wasn’t the problem. For all these years, I felt like shit because I couldn’t be monogamous. Thanks for clueing me in to evolution, reptile brains, etc.

M

Thanks for the nice note, M. Now go forth and cheat no more, i.e., don’t be a CPOS (cheating piece of shit). If you’re incapable of being monogamous, don’t make monogamous commitments that you’re damn well going to break.

And to all the outraged folks writing in to ask if I’m seriously suggesting that no one should ever be monogamous: That’s not what I’m saying—and it’s not what the authors of Sex at Dawn are arguing either. The point of Sex at Dawn—and my point in drawing my readers’ and listeners’ attention to it—isn’t that no one should attempt to be monogamous or that people who’ve made monogamous commitments have a license to cheat on their partners. For the record: I’m happy to acknowledge that there are lots of good reasons to be monogamous and/or very nearly monogamous, e.g., children and other sexually transmitted infections.

What the authors of Sex at Dawn believe—and what I think they prove—is that we are a naturally nonmonogamous species, despite what we’ve been told for millennia by preachers and for centuries by scientists, and that is why so many people have such a hard time remaining monogamous over the long haul. I’m not saying that everyone everywhere has to be nonmonogamous; the authors of Sex at Dawn don’t make that argument either. (Lots of monogamists, however, do run around insisting that everyone everywhere should be monogamous—and proscriptive monogamists get a pass because, hey, they mean so well and wouldn’t it be nice if everyone were?)

The point is this: People—particularly those who value monogamy—need to understand why being monogamous is so much harder than they’ve been led to believe it will be. In some cases, this understanding may help people find the courage to seek out nonmonogamous relationships and/or arrangements and/or allowances that make them—gasp!—happier and make their relationships more stable, not less, as a routine infidelity won’t doom their marriage/civilunion/commitment/slavecontract/whatever. But understanding that monogamy is a struggle for most people—and being able to be honest with our partners about experiencing it as a struggle—may actually help some people remain monogamous.

mail@savagelove.net

117 replies on “Savage Love”

  1. i was expecting the jackass whose girlfriend was raped’s letter to be on today. your answer to that guy was SO satisfying.

  2. Why are people so *offended* at the idea that humans, in general, didn’t start to be monogamous as a rule until fairly recently, and that many, many people have a hard time meeting those expectations? I dare you to find me even one person who hasn’t at least had a crush on someone else while in a relationship, particularly if they’ve ever been in a relationship that lasted more than a couple of years.

  3. @51 – I had the same thought, but given the print schedule maybe it will be next week..

    I’d love to hear if there was any follow up on that situation. Did that guy realize the error of his ways?

  4. Saying that we’re naturally not monogamous just because a few people aren’t capable of keeping it in their pants is like saying we’re naturally schizophrenic because some people do what the voices tell them. It’s ridiculous. As I mentioned last week, if we were meant to fuck everyone we found sexy, people would have given up on it a long time ago.

    I don’t know why so many people can’t wrap their heads around the idea that monogamy is about as “recent” as wearing clothes and vocalizing more complex things than ook eek waaaaaaagh. If you want to fuck around, fuck around. You don’t need to bullshit about with psuedoscience to justify your position.

  5. Thanks #38 for nailing it.
    If I can offer one more tidbit on the “natural” debate — clearly, humans aren’t hard-wired to ANY one sexual pattern. What’s natural to our species is: lots of variability in the way we set up our social and sexual arrangements.
    On a lighter note, the vibrating panties sounded intriguing — thanks #49 for warning me that they suck before I bought some!

  6. @49 What about this? Totally cute, right? It’s like it’s swimming!! 😉

    ><((((º>.•´¯`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><((((º>

  9. Perversecowgirl- God, THANK YOU FOR NIPPING IT IN THE BUD!!!! Succinct, to the point, and exactly right on.

    And truly, if this stupid Sex at Dawn book (which I’m totally over hearing plugged here) cites Dan Savage as a sex “expert” it is not credible as far as I’m concerned. Advice column writer, humorist, free rag editor, okay. But scientific expert? That requires slightly more lofty credentials, mmmkkayyy?

  10. Perversecowgirl- God, THANK YOU FOR NIPPING IT IN THE BUD!!!! Succinct, to the point, and exactly right on.

    And truly, if this stupid Sex at Dawn book (which I’m totally over hearing plugged here) cites Dan Savage as a sex “expert” it is not credible as far as I’m concerned. Advice column writer, humorist, free rag editor, uncommonly insightful individual about human sexual activities and relations, okay. But *scientific expert*? That requires slightly more lofty credentials, mmmkkayyy?

  11. Perversecowgirl (@38), I agree completely. Most people are attracted to others besides their spouse/partner but also get jealous at the thought that their spouse/partner might cheat. So realistically, most people are going to want monogamy AND find it difficult at the same time.

    The fact that people find it difficult doesn’t necessarily mean everyone should abandon the idea. It just means those who want a monogamous commitment should be mentally prepared for the difficulty and keep the lines of communication open to prevent infidelity before it happens. It’s people who think “true love” = “never wanting to cheat” who end up cheating because the strength of the temptation takes them by surprise.

  13. -eyeroll- at the discussion about “unnatural” vs “natural”. If it occurs IN NATURE, it’s “natural”. So while queerness and transsexuality and so on are less COMMON, they’re still perfectly natural, duh.

    As for Dan’s first advice, sorry, you’re doin it rong. If there is any question that someone is using a company credit card to buy personal items – gag gift, sex toys or whatever – then they’re crossing professional boundaries. Unless they actually own the company, and even then it’s iffy.

    I would suggest calling up the boss and saying “I’ve got a parcel here that looks like a personal purchase that’s been directed here. I’m not too sure how that might have happened…?” And let the boss decide what to explain and what to do.

  14. You know, Dan doesn’t really have a lot of rules, and they’re pretty simple: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Love&hellip;

    And if you windbags trolling about the comments section here were regular readers or equipped with better recall of Savage Love and not what-continuity-errors-has-Dan-made-that-I-can-nail-him-on, you might be pondering where and when Auntie Dan wrote these last few columns.

    I mean Sweet Jesus tap dancing Christ – if the Yes on 8 crowd can pass off utterly NON-experts as fucking Professors, shouldn’t we take a more rational view and give Dan a little leeway for the hyperbole of a couple of doctors? Let the man make a little money.

    Keep up the good work Auntie, and lets hear a little more about Sex at Dawn.

  15. @ Tinwoman,
    If you would bother to read what Dan has said REPEATEDLY, you would have seen that he does make the point that some people are successful at being monogamous. His point, however, is that people who are not successful should not have to pretend that they are, thereby hurting their partners and themselves. As someone in a monogamous relationship, I’d rather live in a world where people who are not good at monogamy could be honest about this fact and seek out OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT GOOD AT MONOGAMY. Also, THE WHOLE WORLD ADVOCATES FOR THE IDEA OF MONOGAMY, that is why Dan is using his platform to advocate for the other side. If you have such a problem with it, why do you continue to read his column?

  17. @60 You mean Dan should have more scholarly credentials, like B.ull S.hit, M.ore S.hit, P.iled h.igh and D.eeper? Yeah, I’d really be inclined to listen to someone who’s spent years in academia *studying* sex. He may not be a prof, but if you’re looking for an “expert,” I would challenge you to find anyone with a bunch of letters after his name who could give you better information. What makes a “sex expert” anyway, regardless of schooling? I would say it is the person who has the widest knowledge base, and can therefore pass on the most information.

  18. “but do your amazing sex-advice skills provide you with any ideas on how I should handle this?”

    Gee, did you find any POLYPS up there?

    Yet another example of dangerous idol-worship. So many people seem to think Dan Savage is the be-all and end-all of acceptable sexual behavior. Now he’s claiming the authors of Sex at Dawn have “proven” we are a “naturally nonmonogamous species”?? I sincerely doubt it.

  19. In between singing gigs I often work as a temp, sometimes for months at a time. I’ve had far more awkward situations than Avoid the Awkward’s. This one is simple: put the vibrating undies back in the box, see that she gets them, and never mention it unless she brings it up. It’s a personal item, even though she had it delivered to her work address (people often do this as there’s no one home to receive delivery of mail order items). She owes you no explanation as it’s honestly none of your business. If she wants to explain, she can, but I see no reason why she should.

    As for monogamy, I don’t understand why we can’t all agree that some arrangements work better for some people and other arrangements are better for others. Why is that so hard? Why do so many people seem to feel that if they can’t get everyone to do things their way that it somehow invalidates their own personal choices? That’s rather immature if you ask me.

  20. @68 “So many people seem to think Dan Savage is the be-all and end-all of acceptable sexual behavior.”

    Actually, although I’m sure there are plenty of people who would love to see the live video feed, his own sexual behaviour isn’t what’s being discussed primarily (in my opinion,) it’s his advice to people who need answers about their own sexual behaviour that is appreciated.

  22. @38

    I think the issue is that there’s a distinction between it being “natural” to find others attractive, and it being “natural” to act on those urges (or, rather “unnatural” not to). Lots of maladaptive behavior is natural, but phrasing things the way Dan did makes it into a pejorative.

    Hell, if he’d even just said that polyamory is natural, I’d have no objection. What he said was that monogamy in and of itself is unnatural. No matter how he tries to walk that back, he can’t sprinkle sugar on that bullshit and call it candy.

    @45

    The issue is that normalcy (or, more generally “naturalness”) is actually kind of a big deal in debates about sexuality. Why do you think the homosexual community has spent years (somewhat successfully) saying “this is natural, I didn’t have a choice in it”? It’s not just for shits-and-giggles, it’s because something being “natural” confers legitimacy.

    Dan saying that monogamy is unnatural is (given the context) akin to saying “it’s total bullshit, a simulacrum of ‘good’ behavior with basis only in societal memes” (I spruced up the language). If something is natural, it means that people don’t choose to do it, and hence it is “good” (or, at least, acceptable). If it is “unnatural”, it is purely a choice, and thus loses some legitimacy. The homosexual community has been rallying behind “natural” as being conflated with “perfectly fine” for decades now; turnabout is fair play.

    @52

    Depends on what we’re counting as “recently”. As far back as the Greeks, men were expected to be fairly promiscuous (with other men, mind) in their youth, then settle down with one woman (monogamously) and pop out babies. That’s a few millenia of history to monogamy. And, really, we don’t know how prehistoric societies handled it (since… It was before history), and everything we can speculate on is somewhat specious.

    But, the debate seems to hinge on what one defines as being “nonmonogamous”. I don’t see “having errant thoughts about other people” as being nonmonogamous; I only see action as being a problem. I think it’s natural to find other people passingly attractive; whether that means that the bulk of mankind is also predisposed toward either polyamory or cheating is suspect to me.

    @62

    I was waiting for Freud himself to make an appearance here. The problem with both Freud (and Sex at Dawn) is that they were doing retrospective analysis of what actually exists, and trying to reason out the cause.

    It’d be fine, if it worked. The problem is that it rarely does. Too many confounding variables they have to ignore to make things “fit”. Freud was almost precisely wrong about the origins of human sexuality, and the variations therein, and about most of his psychological views (way too focused on early adolescence).

    The reason scientists proceed from fact toward hypothesis and theory is that it’s damned easy to come up with *an* explanation for an observed phenomenon, but damned hard to come up with the correct one.

    @67

    You’re not really tracking what the argument is, though. If we’re talking about the practical “what the hell do I do in my life” stuff, Dan has as much qualification as any person reasonably can: a decent amount of experience and observation.

    But, when he talks about anthropology, psychology, and evolutionary psychology (or is referenced as an expert on those issues as they relate to human sexuality), he isn’t speaking as an adviser of people in terms of what they should do in their lives, he’s claiming some expertise (even by proxy) for “knowing” some essential truth of humanity. If he wants to claim that, he should have some credentials.

    It’s the difference between someone coming to me and asking for help on a high school physics assignment, and me being cited as an expert on string theory. Yeah, I’m a decent armchair physicist, but that doesn’t make me credible as any authority on the actual science.

    I’m really hoping that you’re making this shit up to illicit a reaction, because if you’re being serious (in that you seem to believe academia is bullshit, scientific knowledge, and studying, aren’t as good as “real world” experience), you’re as ignorant and backwards as the worst tea-partying republican douchebags.

    Incidentally, talk about a circle-jerk. A book which cites Dan Savage as an expert on all facets of human sexuality comes to an ill-conceived, unproved, and completely speculative hypothesis about human sexual history… Which happens to coincide perfectly with Dan’s existing beliefs. Then Dan cites them as a source confirming his beliefs. Jesus.

  26. @52:

    Me. I’ve never felt the urge to cheat on my wife of 14 years, nor on any of my other long-term significant others before her. It’s called Deep and Profound Love and Respect.

    Now that I’m struggling with my wife’s dalliance(s), and feeling so deeply betrayed, I’m having to convince myself that I’ll ever be interested in another. When I look at other women now, all I see is Potential Heartbreak. Meanwhile, at 46 years, I’m not feeling terribly attractive to any future mate. All Dan’s Non-Mon = Normal, Natural, and Unavoidable talk is just salt in the wound. Yay!

  28. Can we just agree to avoid the word “natural,” to acknowledge that monogamy is not simple or a default, and to accept that people in poly- relationships are valid in their choices?

    And I will add my voice to the chorus calling for an end to the Sex at Dawn conversation.

  31. Wait a minute, Dan has a boss? Who, the publisher? I never thought of publisher-editor as a boss-employee kind of relationship. But now that I think about it, I guess it was the publisher of NYPress who fired Jeff Koyen, so I suppose if you can get canned, you’ve got a boss.

  32. @ 67/Canuck – So then we’re all sex experts too, right? Because we read letters to Savage Love. Or is it having those letters addressed to you specifically that reaps such expertise?

    @ 64/Retard Yoke and 67/Canuck:

    Sure he’s smarter than the average bear (which I said). I’d probably bet on his judgment more often than not versus some clinical academic Ph.Ds’ – but if this book is supposed to be scientific and authoritative, sex advice columnist Does. Not. Cut. It. for the distinction of “expert”. Maybe it’s a semantics issue. But it’s a poor choice of words and lazy writing.

  34. In this context, to me, when Dan uses the word ‘unnatural’ means that it is not what we were wired for and therefore any option that goes against the ‘natural’ way means that we are making a willing decission to change our original programming. So, we humans tend to be non-monogamous ‘by nature’ because nature’s call is reproduce-reproduce-reproduce. However, culture has tought us the social and emotional convenience of monomagy. But it takes work and will to achive it. Still, I believe that using the terms ‘natural/unnatural’ brigns the discussion to a terrain that true biggots have allways used against, say, homosexuality, for centuries called ‘the unnatural way’ by its enemies. But I understand the meaning in this context: this is Savage Love, for Chirst’s sake!

  35. @72 Seldon 2639 & @82 Racing Turtles:

    “And why does being cuckolded consistently appear at or near the top of married men’s sexual fantasies, according to experts ranging from Alfred Kinsey to Dan Savage.”

    Okay, guys, that was the quote. It didn’t say Dan was an expert on anthropology, or physiology, or psychology, or even string theory, it was specifically referencing the occurrence of “cuckolding.” And yes, I believe Dan probably has as much to contribute on that subject as any academic.

    And Seldon, no, I don’t believe academia/research/”study” is trumped by “real world experience” in all cases, but I’m not such a devotee of rose-coloured glasses that I don’t believe that there are definitely times when real world experience can give you better information than academia could. I say this as someone who was raised by a Prof., is married to one, went to a good school, and whose friends are mostly academics: Yes, Seldon, they are good at what they do, but there are limitations as well. I have two friends, one is a sociologist, one works with native kids in a secondary school. Which one do you think is the most savvy about what is going on on reserves today, how the kids are treated at home, what their particular challenges are? (hint: it’s not the sociologist.) There are times when anecdotal advice is better advice than that which comes from someone who has theorized about it, written papers on it, studied it, but hasn’t dealt with it in the “real world.” And BTW, I have edited enough articles written by Ph.Ds/grad students/etc., who couldn’t write themselves out of a paper bag, to realize that having a degree doesn’t necessarily mean you have more to say.

  36. @76 I’m so sorry for the pain you are going through. I am also in a 14 year marriage, and my husband told me this year about his infidelity. You clearly feel that your wife does not have “Deep and Profound Love and Respect” for you, and for you, that means that the marriage is over. I’m just writing to say that it is possible to reconcile DPLR with a spouse’s infidelity and lies. Not easy, and the trust doesn’t come back quickly, and I imagine that the next round of his lies, if there is one, will be even harder to bounce back from. But it is possible, for some people, in some marriages.

    Is she asking you to stick around and forgive her, and you are the one wanting out? Or do you feel that she is the one who wants to leave and her affairs were her way of opening the door for her to exit the marriage?

  37. I have no issue with people living their lives the way that fits best for them. I also have no problem with Dan telling people who obviously struggle with monogamous relationships to give non-monogamy a try. I definitely don’t have a problem with him saying that happy non-monogamy is natural and that monogamy is hard for a lot of people.

    What I do have issue with is Dan telling me that something that comes naturally to me is unnatural. I don’t struggle to be monogamous in my relationships. Thoughts or fantasies are one thing, but I have never once been tempted to act on those thoughts or fantasies while still in a relationship.

    Frankly, I find it about 2,000 times harder to put down the ice cream and pick up the broccoli than I do to resist cheating. (And since I do, in fact, occasionally eat broccoli and resist ice cream, it should be clear that avoiding cheating is a non-issue for me.)

    That doesn’t make me better than anyone else who prefers non-monogamy and is honest about that in their relationships… just different. But I am not so unusual, and I’m definitely not unnatural.

  38. Canuck, anthropologists are so win at what they do, because they get into the ‘real world experiences’ as much as they can, and combine it with academics. Anthropologists live and work and play and write about their experiences, and the experiences of the people they live with, and combine it with academic knowledge and theory.

    Anyhoo, while I DO agree with basically everything Dan has to say about monogamy (lots of people suck at it, those people should be with other people who can’t be monogamous in non-monogamous relationships, and we shouldn’t judge them for doing what works for them) I am KINDA GETTING SICK of going over and over and over it. I’m pretty sure those of us who read Dan have all heard lots of evidence and have picked a position that we’re pretty much sticking with.

    last point, I think people too often blame the relationship, and not the partner or themselves. Monogamous relationships, polyamourous relationships, all of them are going to fail if you’re being an ass, or your partner is a jerk.

  39. This has nothing to do with the article, but I don’t know how to contact you otherwise.

    http://tinycoke.com/AM1k3

    This is a list of filthy words that are banned from use in the video game Dragon Quest 9. It’s an impressive list. Down about 1149 nasty words, though… you find “Santorum.” CONGRATULATIONS! You’ve hit the big time: Censorship in a video game.

  40. A.
    Why the pained calls to stop discussing (and plugging) a book that so many people in this thread want to discuss? You can stop reading, but don’t make the rest of us stop.

    B.
    The more intolerant voices on this topic seem to come from the (insecure?) monogamists who don’t like to think that their way is not the only way. Dan’s basic point is that non-monogamy can be acceptable. No prescriptions or proscriptions either way.

    C.
    Just a thought: I wonder if any of the “devout” monogamists who claim to never be tempted would in fact be able to resist the opportunities that come with being a rich, famous, and attractive celebrity. If most people don’t find me attractive, should I boast about my ability to stay faithful to my partner?

  43. @Wish I Were Bi

    I may not be celebrity attractive, but I’m reasonably attractive and certainly would have opportunities if I wished it.

    And for that matter, I think I’d be even LESS tempted to cheat if men were throwing themselves at me constantly, because I’d be more inclined to write off decent guys who might in other circumstances be attractive to me.

    I don’t think I’m being intolerant. I have no issue with those who want to be non-monogamous. I’m taking issue with being called unnatural and a liar (because Dan says I struggle and I say I don’t).

  44. @90 — “If most people don’t find me attractive, should I boast about my ability to stay faithful to my partner?”

    You are clearly an ass.

  45. I believe that if your partner is GGG enough for you there is no need for cheating. I Used to be a cheating bastard, jumping from one pussy to the other, looking for what I needed to be sexually happy. I finally found a woman who was right for me in that and all respects and we are now happily married and fucking each others`s brains…she is the best lover ever!!!! I am good looking and outgoing and usually get lots of attention from the ladies but it really doesn`t attract me to to have sex with anybody else anymore as I am 100% sure no one will be a better lover than my beloved wife.
    Take home message: find someone who really makes you happy in the way you need to be, if this person is making you this happy, you likely are making him/her happy too. This will shutdown the cheating switch we all have inside.
    J.

  46. Regarding workplace embarrassment, after work beers a few weeks ago revealed the problem of going “live” in a sales presentation. The presenter started to type a URL, and auto-complete showed a list of very naughty, obviously porn, URLs. I think the presenter just did what they had to, and selected the correct URL and moved on — or maybe the story involved an inadvertent click on something awful involving donkeys. In any case, it’s a matter of keeping your cool, continuing to act professionally. Remember your audience is more embarrassed than you are.

  48. What’s with the emoticon hate? There isn’t really a better way to express 😛 or 😉 in text form. Maybe *wink* or *smile* but that’s kinda lame. They are way closer to actual expressions of feeling than things like lol or rofl.

    Funny though, Dan did in fact use an emoticon in his answer to JFH.

  49. I like dan and his straight to the point advice. But I am tired Dan so desperately trying to justified cheating on his husband, by putting down monogamy. the lady does protest too much!… near monogamy? please!…

    I find dan point pathetic, it is hard to be monogamous, so why bother trying is not a point.

    Dan, I hope one day you meet a man that satisfied your sexual needs, not just your emotional needs enough, to make you happy to try to be monogamous with… and that you respect enough to not cheat on him ( yes, even if he knows) when a hot ass comes your way.

  50. We have a reptilian brain and we can control ourselves?, beside why should you. is that your excuse for cheating on your husband… but any justification will do right?

    nothing is going to stop you from getting that Ass .. because you are man and you can help yourself.. how dare your husband expect you to be respectful of your marriage and family when you have that reptilian brain just pushing you to fuck around… is not your fault, really… is the crazy brain of yours that you have no control over…. Poor Dan.

    You can’t stop yourself.
    Not The real posibilty of decease, and bring it back to you husband.
    Not the kid that has to live with the fear their parents might break-up ( because no matter how discrete you think you are, they know. )

    Not The very real possibility that you might fall in love with the piece on the side you are screwing and want to make him your 1st and not your 2nd.

    not that your extra might be in love with you and not just having fun. or that he might go all fetal attraction… it happens!

    not to mention that your spouse might just be going along with this because he doesn’t want to lose the man he loves, or worse: the cushy life you provide for him is more important then your fidelity.

    This are just a few of the problems that I have observe with this game.

    And might question is Dan why would you wan’t to place your husband and family in the middle of a very complicated situation just because you need to rub one off with someone that is not your husband? and moreover why be with someone that does not satisfied you sexually?

Comments are closed.