@100: Getting regular boners at work sounds like a quick way to lose your run-of-the-mill colonoscopy tech gig. Some great television material there, though. "Tonight on a very special ER..."

Why is the wife of the guy FAIL hooked up with harassing FAIL? Doesn't she realize she was horribly betrayed by her husband, not by FAIL? If my husband told a woman on a business trip we were "in an open relationship" I would certainly not blame any woman he hooked up with; I would DTMFA.

I know this might be a shock, danny boy, but to some people a kiss is a lot more meaningful than to others (you). A "meaningless kiss" is an oxymoron to those people, and they are not few. The problem isn't that she gave some guy tongue while drunk, it's that she not only didn't tell him, but that she fucking lied about it. "I've never let it get out of hand" is a flat out lie, and she knew it. I wouldn't want to be married to a person like that because it is only a matter of time before she lets it get out of hand and she fucks someone while drunk. I'm rather shocked that you'd be so insulting to someone with a genuine problem, and that problem is not that he's a prude; it's that his wife doesn't respect him enough to lay off the sauce and stop feeling up everyone in a 10 foot radius.

@103 It all depends on what the wife knows and how she found out? Who is sge going to belief, her "loving" husband or some lying skank? We don't really know the facts or even very many of them? Just what FAIL said happened? Some wifes (Hillary) are delusional about their husband's infidelity and wikk do whatever to maintain the illusion.

@103 It all depends on what the wife knows and how she found out? Who is sge going to belief, her "loving" husband or some lying skank? We don't really know the facts or even very many of them? Just what FAIL said happened? Some wifes (Hillary) are delusional about their husband's infidelity and will do whatever to maintain the illusion.

Dan's advice to STH was solid, though the woman isn't entirely without "blame" here. STH is controlling, by definition, as are ALL people who are into strict monogamy. Monogamy is an enforced behavioral code, and enforcing a behavior code on someone (that that person wouldn't otherwise follow) is sort of the definition of controlling. It's not *necessarily* bad to be controlling in some instances (drug abuse intervention?), but STH's reaction seems a bit extreme. What, exactly, is the threat/harm in the wife (even if she were to do it at this point) making-out with a gay man? I suppose it's a potential vector for the flu, cold, encephalitis, or oral herpes, but I'd hope her friend isn't gonna kiss her while he's sick... It's not like there's a threat to the relationship: she's not gonna leave her long-term partner and future husband for a gay man (and if she is, wouldn't you rather it happen sooner than later?). The only thing I can see as being problematic about kissing someone else is that she's not all "his" or something like that, but, again, that's unreasonable, controlling behavior, since she ISN'T "his". Women are people now, not property, with legally equal (mostly) rights and everything. The same holds true for flirty men; I feel like the implication that Dan would apply a double-standard here is without cause, as he typically come down on the side of "monogamy is an unrealistic expectation," irrespective of gender.

The fact is that monogamy IS an unrealistic expectation for a majority of the population: most people "cheat" (though it might not be cheating, depending on the relationship) at some point or points (does someone have the data for a 2009 yearly sex-practices poll?). That said, people who don't/won't/can't handle monogamy really shouldn't date/marry people who are really into it, so the wife isn't without some responsibility. Yes cultural pressure tells us we're bad people if we're not monogamous, but that doesn't mean we have to bow to it. So, controlling strict-monogamy types: loosen up and work on a supportive, loving relationship that your partners won't want to leave instead of obsessing over behavior that presents minimal-to-no risk to you. As for people who are bad at monogamy: don't listen to the cultural pressures that say monogamy is necessary or even desirable - own-up to the fact that your bad at monogamy (or strict monogamy) and be up-front about it with your sex partners, as it's still assumed to be the norm. Definitely don't marry people who want something radically different from a relationship than do you.

111/John: Dan's advice to STH was solid, though the woman isn't entirely without "blame" here. STH is controlling, by definition, as are ALL people who are into strict monogamy. Monogamy is an enforced behavioral code, and enforcing a behavior code on someone (that that person wouldn't otherwise follow) is sort of the definition of controlling.

Let's say you're considering joining a carpool and you're a person who loves to talk. The people in the carpool tell you that one of their rules is that you have to be quiet.

Are they, by your definition, controlling? Yes.

But are they enforcing their behavioral code on you? No.

You can choose to join another carpool, one with people who love to talk just as much as you do. If you choose to join the quiet carpool, knowing full-well in advance what their rule is, and then talk anyway (or complain about being "controlled"), you're a jerk.

Regard STH and his flirtatious wife, I am always a bit suspect of anyone who claims to have a serious relationship issue and then writes an open letter to an advice columnists (be it Dan or Dear Abby) seeking affirmation of what they believe or how they are handling the situation. Such people don't really seem to want help, but rather permission to keep doing what is clearly not working. I doubt Dan really needs to spell out how a mature person should handle the situation: It is not unreasonable for the husband to expect that his wife won't "go wild" and grope or kiss other people, but he needs to be reasonable with what his expectations are and also consider whether his own behavior is contributing to the problem. Kissing some gay guy (meaning it wasn't go to go anywhere) before they were married was mildly disrespectful to him, but it wasn't some grand betrayal, and he is just using that incident to support his insecurities about their relationship. And there's nothing attractive about an insecure person. He needs to have a calm and rational conversation with his wife about how her drinking and resulting "wild behavior" concerns him, and how he wants her to get her drinking under control, not just for his peace of mind, but for her own well-being. Then, he needs to tell her that he loves her for who she is, including her warm, earthy, and even flirty personality, and that he's fine with her being bubbly and out-going with others, so long as she keeps it within reasonable boundaries (and dancing with others and non-tongue kissing should be reasonable for him). Finally, he needs to LET GO, and accept that how she handles herself is up to her. He needs to either trust her, or not, and if he doesn't trust her, whether or not she gives him reason for his mistrust, he needs to understand that it is HIS problem to resolve, which may include simply letting go of his jealousy, getting therapy, or perhaps acknowledging that his relationship with his wife is not a good match and that he needs to move on.

Re HOPE ...

Am I missing something? Isn't he a GUY ... IN COLLEGE ... who wants to be with guys ... WHO FART?

College was many years ago now, but I don't recall this being a problem.

And re STH ...

Let's review: "When my wife gets drunk, she gets crazy flirtatious. She'll dance close to people, touch them, hold hands."

Dance close? Touch them? Hold hands? These are not "crazy flirtatious" moves, STH. This what what a lot of monogamous people do when they dance with someone-not-their-partner. It's why dancing is fun; it's socially condoned flirting. It lets off the steam built up by monogamy. Who told you it was wrong?

If this is morally objectionable to you, like it's against how you read the Bible, then you need to leave this marriage ASAP, and move to Footloose UT.

STH doesn't say his wife gets drunk all the time, which would be a problem.

Seth's obsession with The Kiss, not to mention with others' sexual orientation, lead me to believe he needs to get drunk and dance and flirt with some ladies. He will see that lightning won't strike him dead, and then he can cut his new wife some slack.

In other words, STH: Get over yourself. If things are, overall, "excellent," keep your eye on the big picture. You're married to a loving, sexy lady who doesn't have problems showing affection.

As for the jack-asses whining about Mr. Savage so-called recycling his 'letter of the day', by adding it to the 'letters of the week' (do I have this big shtink over nothing correct?) , MY GOD, GET A DAMN LIFE ! You KNOW you have paid $10, $20, $100., & a LOT more depending on if you were seeing a movie, a Broadway show on opening night, trying a very new and trendy eatery, a performance art showing, etc. And you also DEFINATELY KNOW that you have been SO MUCH MORE entertained by SAVAGE LOVE for FREE than these other pretentious social activities. Save for a very few Indy films & actually laughing with disgust at mainstream Hollywood movies & T.V., honestly, how often do you idiots actually LAUGH OUT LOUD? No, LOL does NOT count. Well I thank my lucky stars for Mr. Savage every day just as you BOOBS should instead of nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking.
By the way, yes, you absolutely ALWAYS TIP in the sex service industry even if you are w/ a $5k per hour sex worker. $100. is fine for a tip. It's a gesture, to show you are pleased with the service. I made sure my clients were pleased enough to leave huge tips, jewelry, cars, rent, etc
EX- SEX INDUSTRY KITTEN / LOVER/OF AND DAN YENTA

I loved the definition of a successful marriage. The physicist's point of view, just for fun: every endless cycle has its so called "characteristic time scale" which could be defined let's say as the average time it takes for the cycle to complete one turn (the period of a pendulum, etc...). A physicist would say each individual's appreciation of success is correlated with the threshold in this time scale each of us is willing to tolerate... one idiocy per year, per lustre (well, a decent model should include of course some measure of the intensity of the "wrong doing"!)

...And then your biologist partner will start looking at how much the threshold depends on nature (genes) and nurture (environment), etc... If you're lucky you will stop discussing at some point and proceed to the occasional leavening moment :)

cheers Dan.

I think farts are hilarious so I guess I'd be laughing my way through sex - - which might be a bigger turnoff than the farts.

wooa...didn't know about such Eproctophilia thing... also learning something everyday

Hey, I have a question: if my particular kink is monogamy and the idea of this person being with me exclusively is what really gets me off, then wouldn't a partner not willing to indulge this be a) sexually selfish if it's not harmful or difficult or b) just not suited to me it it is.

Anyone concerned about flirting and touching and kissing and whatnot could probably get a more positive response if they framed it that way I'd wager.

That said, if she's sorry then he should forgive her and work this out together.

dude- if you date a guy, any guy and get to know him for long enough... you will never, ever be able to stop the farts.

FAIL needs to learn to use the "block" button on facebook.