SSSH--I'm faculty at a big state school. We have definite rules about getting involved with students, and I'll bet that your school does too. Maybe your faculty member likes the danger element, and the very real possibility of losing his job if he gets caught turns him on. Maybe he's just stupid. But if he's in the position to assign you a grade (and maybe if he's not), what he's doing with you is incredibly unethical. Both of you (and Dan) seem pretty blase about sex that could end someone's career.

You told WIMP to use sex/physical contact as a means of control? That's pretty fucked up, Dan. I specifically remember you being against that kind of manipulation. All that will lead to is resentment and the dissolution of trust. And the only reason you got away with it with Terry is because you've been together for almost two decades and you have a kid. If I had just recently started a relationship and my boyfriend pulled that shit, he would be so fucking dumped. I'm usually with you, Dan, but not on this one.

I appreciate the advice to CBH. As a new mom, the last thing I want to think about is sex of any sort, let alone sex I'm incapable of having.

Sex work and surrogate partner therapy are not the same

Wait, doesn't a sexual surrogate's job sometimes (often?) involve having sex with a client/patient? If so, how is that not sex work? And how is that legal if prostitution is not?

even the most common sexual fantasies appeal only to small subsets of people

Okay, wait. Not that it matters to Dan's point, but that makes no sense. There are plenty of sexual practices that very large subsets of people engage in. Surely they have also fantasized about those practices?

Here's a sample college policy:

Consensual Relations

The well-being of the learning and teaching community at [redacted] College depends upon the existence of a relationship of trust, respect, and fairness between the staff and the students. Romantic and/or sexual relations, even if consensual, between staff members and their students (those whom they currently supervise, coach, advise, teach, or evaluate in any way) violate the integrity of the student/staff relationship as described above. Such relations are therefore prohibited by the College and constitute grounds for disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.

Because any romantic and/or sexual relationship between a staff member and student, or between a staff member and any person he or she may supervise has the potential to jeopardize the quality of the academic, living or working environment of the community, the College strongly discourages such relations. The College will therefore take appropriate disciplinary action (up to and including dismissal) should such a relationship be found to undermine the trust, respect, and fairness that are central to the success of [redacted]’s educational mission.

A wimpy capped scooter is far scarier to me than a real motorcycle that can go highway speeds.

The danger isn't falling so much, that happens but experience and the motorcycle safety classes help, the problem is not being seen by cars and not being able to put yourself in a safe spot in the road. Being able to go the speed of traffic helps you be in a safe place.

But I am biased, I really miss my motorcycle riding days. And I was a passenger with my parents from a very young age.

Anyway, fear-controlling is never a good place to be with someone you love. That said, I completely agree with the moustache thing, but that is more of an ick thing.

I agree with 2 and have to think that Dan was joking with his answer to WIMP. At least, I hope he was. Where would you draw the line? Withdraw sex to get your way for everything? Honey, no sex until you buy me the car I want? No sex until you agree it's my family for the holidays?

Much worse is how quickly it backfires. Boyfriend says "fine, no sex, and I get my motorcycle." Next thing you know, YOU'RE the one who's horny and suffering with no sex.

Better would be to find out what the appeal is to the motorcycle. Talk about that. Find out if there's another way. If the appeal really is that he likes danger and likes manipulating his girlfriend by putting himself in danger, if he gets off on having her worry about him, then end the relationship at once and skip the no-sex nonsense as an intermediary step.

7-Eirene-- But does a sexual relationship between a student and a faculty member actually jeopardize the quality of the academic, living or working environment of the college community?

Does it jeopardize it any more than a friendly non-sexual relationship?

Does it jeopardize it any more than any relationship with the same age differential?

In other words, is the problem the relationship itself, or is the danger the school rules? By analogy, some illegal drugs are truly a danger to the person who uses them, but in some cases, the danger is in getting caught and having your life ruined by the judicial system over an amount of marijuana that genuinely wasn't going to do any harm.

I'm asking the question because I honestly don't know. The harm in faculty/student sexual relationships is one of those things I've taken for granted for so long that I haven't really questioned it. I definitely can see the harm in a situation where the faculty member is in a position to grade or recommend the student. That's got way too much potential to be an abuse of power, but what if it's a large university and the faculty member is a different and distant department?

Dan, I think your lack of experience dating and being married to women leads you to render unrealistic advice, like this gem: "In a year or maybe two, after your sex life has kicked back into gear, your wife might be willing to either explore your fantasies through role-play games or give you a pass to get with a woman with a dick"

Sure, and your wife might also be completely down with you sleeping with her friends, quitting your job and selling your suits for the latest Ed Hardy collection. But I wouldn't count on any of this, you know, actually happening.

Hey, WIMP and Dan - if you don't like the motorcycle and the mustache, send 'em my way (not that Terry would probably be interested in a girlie-type, but still...!)

@9: Just what I was going to say. I have a friend who is a pretty avid motorcyclist, and when I told him I was thinking about getting a scooter, he was horrified for that very reason. It's one of those counterintuitive things where the option that seems more dangerous actually isn't.

Er, I guess I meant @8, although @9 makes good points as well.

Geez Dan, what's gotten into you?

Fortunately, there's an answer to a girlfriend who withholds sex to get you to do what they want: DTMFB.

It's like negotiating with terrorists.

Advising "waiting a hear and maybe your wife will give you a pass to explore your fantasy with a chick with a dick" is about the same as advising "But a bunch of scratch-offs and you might get enough money to pay off your credit cards."

Sure, that outcome is possible, but it's not very likely, especially if it's already causing relationship friction.

Advice to LW #1 CBH, IDK how realistic that is. They managed to find time to get pretty freaky pre-baby, but finding time to do it post-baby is likely a lot harder. (YMMV) *her* fantasy at that point might be a night of uninterrupted sleep. IDK when new parents can pull off even having the discussion about his fantasies that won't sound intimidating, let alone the energy to get a sitter & go somewhere to indulge in said freakiness. They might have a better shot than @11 thinks they do, maybe, but that's because pegging is not as common as it might be amongst Sloggers, & they leveled up to that. ;)

Meh, mebbe I couldn't do much better w/ that advice after all. I'd make sure the wife is feeling appreciated, rested up & that whatever she needs to feel desirable again happens, way before any penis-sproutin' fantasies are revealed.

Hey Dan, disagree with your advice to WIMP. See @2 & @9, it just seems like kind of a dick move. "I won't fuck you until you don't like motorcycles anymore" probably won't lead to the partner not liking motorcycles anymore, it'll just lead to them sneaking rides on other friends' bikes & possibly resenting WIMP, where concern is what WIMP seeks to express.

WIMP may be able to communicate their fears more clearly to his/her BF, & maybe if the boyfriend took a defensive driving course or similar for motorcycles, & promised to use appropriate safety gear, WIMP can try to rest a little easier.

I've ridden on the back of a motorcycle a couple of times. It was glorious! But most of my pals who have wiped out on bikes have wiped out hard. :/ I don't blame WIMP for being nervous.

Hi. I'm from an extended family full of bikers and we're all still alive and unmaimed. My advice to the LW is to let him get a real bike, because it will be able to travel with the flow of traffic, as well as be larger and thus more visible.

Not the LWs question exactly but, here's how to not die on a motorcycle:

1. Know that everyone else on the road is an idiot and better armored than you. Drive with this in mind. Put a lot of space between you and them.

2. Helmets, closed toed shoes and jeans, at least. Every time.

3. Black makes you look like a badass, sure, but brighter colors greatly improve the chances everyone else on the road will see you. My motorcycle is yellow.

4. If you lose control, jump. I've never had to, but you do NOT want to be hanging on still if you hit a truck.

In answer to LW's actual question, though, how do you deal? You express your worry as a calm rational adult. Then you back off. It's natural to worry about our loved ones, but most accidental deaths occur at home doing normal everyday stuff. (Go figure, since that's what we're usually doing, after all.) But the point is, avoiding overtly dangerous pastimes will not save you. Being careful and mindful of your surroundings just might.

And doing something you just love might not lengthen your life, but it might make it BETTER. What are your priorities, really?

@4 seandr: You beat me to it!

Dan & @8 UrbanDuck: I'm not crazy about mustaches, either.

@19 Eva Hopkins: I agree! While I, too, have had the pleasure of riding on the back of a motorcycle holding on tight, I've witnessed friends and my brother wipe out (no deaths, luckily, but still), too.
Where do I sign up for WIMP's nervous list?

I know that MOST universities have policies strictly forbidding sexual relationships between students and professors, but that does not mean that ALL universities have such policies. I went to a major university in Canada and the only rule about student-professor relationships (and student-TA, etc) relationships was that the student must be of legal age (first year students can enrol at age 17 if they have a late birthday) and that the staff member cannot be responsible for grading that student. If it is a small course with no second grader the student's work must be graded by a department head. Not every school imposes no-go rules. Frankly, I was always impressed with the level of maturity my school had towards this issue. The ethical issue is about conflict of interest and favourtism, not some puritanical view of sex.

In one sort of nervousness, there is a worrier. The loved one wants to go out and do normal things, but the worrier confuses worry with love, and while it may not be conscious, controls with worry. So the teenager wants to learn to drive, intends to wear a seatbelt, but the parent screams "No! I love you too much, better stay home where you're safe!" It's sick. Since this is a sex column, a better example might be to mix it with puritanical values. The teenager wants to explore sexual relationships and know to use condoms, but the parent freaks at the idea that the teenager is growing up and growing outside the parent's control. I've used child/parent relationships for my example since that's been my experience, but the basic disfunctional dynamic could show up anywhere, in this case husband/wife.

On the other hand, there are real dangers out there. It's not crazy controlling to object to someone you love doing something truly dangerous. I don't know enough about motorcycles to say, but my understanding is that even with precautions, deadly accidents are more a matter of when, not if.

Which leads to why anyone would like to play with motorcycles. It's pretty obvious why someone would want to have sex or drive a car. It's not as obvious why anyone would want to risk their life at high speeds. I understand basic exhilaration, but that can be gotten safer ways, and most people don't normally need it regularly. I start to wonder if the exhilaration becomes a drug, and the motorcyclist craves more and more.

There's also the turn-around to my first scenario. This is where the person is so fed up with being controlled with senseless worry that he turns the power dynamic on its head. Want to get back at your sniveling controlling worrying wife? Leave her in a constant state of anxiety. Use her very love as a weapon against her. Hey, it doesn't even have to be as a payback for over-worry in the first place. It can just be a dick move.

This may be where Dan was coming from when he suggested withholding sex. Use a dick move against a dick move. I just wish he'd spelled out the steps.

@20 - KDru - I have always been firmly opposed to my husband's desire to get a motorcycle - I have visions of having to go to a morgue to identify the smear of raspberry jam that used to be my spouse - but your post convinced me to give him a chance.

Right up until this line - "But the point is, avoiding overtly dangerous pastimes will not save you. Being careful and mindful of your surroundings just might."

Hahahahahahahaha. He is very absent-minded and easily distracted, I don't think that will save him.

So you're from a family of riders, you're a good person to ask - should I let him ride anyway, as long as he's carefully coated in armor? He's a mechanic/handyman, so he's always up to his elbows in dangerous stuff anyway.... It just seems like a shop accident is likely to only take a digit or a limb, whereas a road accident could just as easily cripple or kill.

And if you're willing to help my husband by trying to ease my worries but don't want to derail this thread entirely, my email is marley(underscore)soluna, at yahoo dot com.

@10 I do believe there could be pretty powerful negative consequences from faculty-student relationships. I've dated my boss, at a small company where there are no rules against it, and I think some of the consequences would be similar. From a personal perspective, I was instantly treated differently by coworkers, and I imagine a student dating a faculty member would be treated differently by their peers. It comes in both positive (probably picked first for study groups) and negative (people are more likely to talk about you behind your back, not include you in informal groups where some shit-talking of the prof may take place) forms. From a community perspective, all of a sudden you've elevated one person above the rest, and this is bound to cause a divide. The cute, straight-A student may wonder why he/she wasn't desired, causing jealousy or resentment or a loss of focus in the class.

I'm not addressing the power imbalance within the relationship because I don't think that's really what the university-wide rules are concerned with. Or at least I hope not. But I am attempting to demonstrate a few ways that this kind of relationship affects people beyond its two active parties.

Surprised at all the people complaining that the girlfriend would withhold sex to get her way. Did you not read the point where the couple compromised, then the boyfriend said "screw it, I'm buying a motorcycle anyway". Is that how you think a relationship SHOULD work?

I love this column, because there are always at least one or two examples where Dan's advice is way off the charts, and anyone who automatically agrees with everything he says should have their head(s) examined. Go dissenters!

Not crazy about the advice this week.

@1 - I'm staff at a Big State U and while staff who do not have a power relationship with students may date them, faculty do not. Graduate students and TAs and anyone in a power relationship are expressly forbidden. Still, maybe he's not in a position to influence her grades, and then Dan's advice is good.

@2 - yeah, that one had me shaking my head. All I can say is, Dan and Terry have years invested...and it's a major change which does more directly affect Dan, up close and personal. This is not true regarding the motorcycle. As a 30 year motorcycle rider, I agree: scooters are actually more dangerous, and the danger of bikes is vastly over-rated. Hospitals, certainly, but also Iatrogenic errors are statistically much much more dangerous.

@4 - Ditto, this seems to be a very slight dividing line...and fundamentally the same thing.

@20: you missed: ATGATT

@25: when you're on a bike and all the 'cagers around you are acting clueless, it tends to get your attention. Just because he's absentminded otherwise, does not mean he will be on the back of a bike. The brain really is the best safety gear.

@27: No, and I understand her concern. But 1) saying "no ass for you unless..." is a good way to make your partner see you as a manipulative douche and 2) WIMP's boyfriend hasn't actually gotten the motorcycle yet - he's "looking to upgrade". But he did try their compromise ("motorcycle/scooter hybrid") and found that it wasn't to his taste. That's called giving it a fair shot. Withholding sex is a fuck of a lot more unilateral (not to mention unfair), don't you think?

Manipulating your partner by witholding sex will always backfire. It is also like putting up a big, pussy-shaped billboard that says, "My logical arguments are insufficient!" That's embarrassing.

There are good reasons to not have sex, and you should never be coerced into having sex you don't want. But using sex to manipulate decision making is NOT okay. Bad Dan.

@33, Fair enough, but I wasn't reading his advice that literal. I was thinking more of a "not sure I want to be in a long term relationship with someone when I'm terrified every time they leave the house" conversation than a "no more for you if I don't get my way" one.

To all those who thought Dan's advice to LW1 was unrealistic: I don't agree! The LW had kinky sex with his wife before the baby, and wants to keep going on the kinky trajectory. While that might have been possible, the baby put sex on pause. It does go on unpause after awhile.

I know from experience! I had a baby 15 months ago, and the kinky sex with my husband went out the window for awhile. We still had sex, but for a few months it was, let's face it, a lot of mediocre quickies. It was important to stay connected, but you're pretty exhausted. Now that the baby's a little older, the kink is starting to work its way back in. This will happen with LW, too.

She may never agree to let him fuck a chick-with-actual-dick, but the chances that she'll start pegging him again, and engaging in pretend-play where she has a dick, are very high if he just waits the baby period out.

People should not overestimate motorcycle safety. According to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in 2006, 13.10 cars out of 100,000 ended up in fatal crashes. The rate for motorcycles is 72.34 per 100,000 registered motorcycles. Motorcycles also have a higher fatality rate per unit of distance travelled when compared with automobiles. **Per vehicle mile traveled, motorcyclists' risk of a fatal crash is 35 times greater than a passenger car.**

There is a reason that people who work in emergency medicine sometimes refer to motorcycles as (organ) "donorcycles".

Did you really suggest to WIMP that she withhold sex until the BF gets rid of his bike?
Withholding sex is never a good idea, you'll either end up with him leaving you for someone who a) likes his bike and/or b) will put out.

I'm going to disagree on Dan's answer to FetLife dude. If he's on FetLife, and especially if he plans on getting involved with his local scene, they are going to cross paths, and they are going to need to learn to be civil to each other. The problem with Dan's advice is if LW is at an event giving out his FetLife name, and she hears of the deception that way, she's gonna be pissed.

A simple, "Hey, I thought you should know it's LW. Realized after hitting the 'like' button that I probably shouldn't have, but what's done is done. Hope you're doing well. Take care. LW"

An even better option, if he doesn't have any FL friends yet, is to just jettison the FetLife account, start a new one, and be a little more careful with that 'like' button next time.

I was nervous when I found out that my husband (then boyfriend) rode a motorcycle. But after I went riding with him a few times the nervousness greatly reduced. I still worry a bit, but not much more than I worry about him driving a car. Motorcyclists are often much better and safer drivers than people in automobiles; they have to watch out for everybody on the road, because most often car-drivers are not aware of them. And there are many advantages to riding a motorcycle, such as gas mileage - even a big, heavy Harley-Davidson can get 40-50 miles to the gallon. It's also much easier to find parking. And on a motorcycle you don't get caught in traffic jams, because it's possible - and *legal* - for a motorcyclist to drive between all the stopped cars.

As both a motorcyclist and scooterist, both vintage and modern, my advice to WIMP would be:
1. Insist the boyfriend take a motorcycle safety course if he hasn't already. If he has, insist he take an advanced rider course.
2. Take the course with him, or if he's already taken one, take one yourself. You don't have to ever ride again if you don't want to, but you will gain at least some understanding of what he enjoys AND some authority when arguing against it.
3. Insist he wear safety gear. All The Gear All The Time - full face helmet, armored jacket, gloves, full length pants, and over-the-ankle boots with good ankle support. I've taken a couple tumbles off bikes, and statistically your feet and hands are the second most likely to be injured after the head. Even putting a foot down for a sec to catch a little slip will sprain an ankle without good support. There is plenty of awesome gear out there that is reflective, armored, and stylish these days, for men and women of all body types. It's expensive, but much less expensive than a trip to the ER or a debilitating injury.
4. Do not threaten to withhold physical or emotional affection. It will come across as selfish - there is a reason many motorcyclists and scooterists self-identify themselves as such rather than just as "someone who rides" - the act, the community, and the experience is unique. If you love this man, you have to respect his desires, and throttling back his actions because YOU are more risk-averse than he is unfair. Mitigating risk through education and protection is a fair request, complete avoidance of an enjoyable activity is not.

For those who think scooters are inherently more dangerous than motorcycles - put aside the cheap Chinese crap that's inherently dangerous. Any scooter over 100cc can keep up with city/suburban traffic. Anything over 150cc can keep up with highway traffic. My 30+ year-old 2-stroke Vespa will pass traffic on the interstate, and gets away from traffic plenty fine on city streets. There are plenty of modern scooters that can pull speeds of 85-95mph with ease.

The boyfriend should get a bike designed to do what he'd like to do with it, and for his riding style. The only other advice I'd give is to not cheap out on technology your life depends on, and make sure it can get away from traffic - no 50cc dinky bikes, and no Chinese clones. (Taiwanese and Japanese bikes are generally of excellent quality, mainland Chinese bikes are the equivalent of Chinese iPhone clones - junk.)

A comment for WIMP - speaking as a man whose divorce was, in part, motivated by my irrepressible desire to ride motorcycles and my ex-wife's disapproval of me putting myself in danger, I would suggest doing whatever you can to get your head around your boyfriend's riding. And, if you can't do that, to accept that you may have just discovered a fundamental incompatibility in how much risk you're prepared to accept in life.

There are, in fact, plenty of women out there who love bikes, and he only has one lifetime to live. My advice to him, if you can't bring yourself to be cool with his riding, would be to politely detach himself from you and go find someone more compatible.

No woman is worth giving up motorcycling for. Life just shouldn't work that way.

A comment for WIMP - speaking as a man whose divorce was, in part, motivated by my irrepressible desire to ride motorcycles and my ex-wife's disapproval of me putting myself in danger, I would suggest doing whatever you can to get your head around your boyfriend's riding. And, if you can't do that, to accept that you may have just discovered a fundamental incompatibility in how much risk you're prepared to accept in life.

There are, in fact, plenty of women out there who love bikes, and he only has one lifetime to live. My advice to him, if you can't bring yourself to be cool with his riding, would be to politely detach himself from you and go find someone more compatible.

No woman is worth giving up motorcycling for. Life just shouldn't work that way.

@10: 7's point being that if you are being arrested for growing pot in the biology lab, a monologue regarding how marijuana isn't actually a dangerous drug and should be legal will not get the cuffs off. It's not what the actual harm is, but that there are rules against it and those rules are going to fall on you regardless of how you feel about the logic of it, or about your being a special exception to the rules because: snowflake.

It seems highly unlikely that she met an English professor while getting her advanced engineering degree and so there is zero chance the prof will ever be in a position of authority of her. If she's screwing someone in her department, who was and/or could be her supervisor, on her PhD committee, etc, it's not smart. It's not like there are no other male persons on the ground at an engineering college.

It's also not that those relationships never end well. It's that often enough they don't, so employers have taken pre-emptive steps to try and shield themselves from the fallout.

The Second one "WIMP". First off, if my SO made me choose between a bike and her, she probably wouldn't like the answer. Second, advising holding out sex?!? Really? After all the times he has given people a pass for cheating if their partner was withholding?

sounds like ASFPT has an inferiority complex about the sex work, er, "surrogate partner therapy" they do ;-)

@37: I think a big problem with Dan's advice there comes down to your phrase "kinky trajectory" and what it means.

If it's "back to doing a lot of the kinky stuff we did pre-baby, once Mom is sleeping through the night and not leaking and her body feels more familiar again" then it's likely.

If it's "that pre-baby kink isn't enough and I need MORE MORE MORE MORE, like seeing other people who have dicks" then it's more worrisome. Dan wrote about that trajectory earlier this week, where kink for some people becomes like a drug habit that needs constantly bigger hits. ("Pegging doesn't mean I'm into guys --> actually now I want to know what sex is like with an actual penis, and without you" being a pretty common fear.) And when their frustrated partners leave, it's not with good things to say about the fun of dating kinky people.

Re: Withholding Sex
I think there's an important difference between a mustache and a motorcycle.

The mustache (I assume) isn't a passion for Terry, so a sex ultimatum doesn't force him to make a difficult choice.

And generally speaking, a person should have some veto power when it comes to significant changes in their partner's appearance. I'd certainly squawk if my wife decided to grow out her leg hair, although withholding sex probably wouldn't get me anywhere.

Really Dan, you are suggesting sexual blackmail as a way to deal with relationship issues? How many relationships or marrages have beed destroyed by one or the other saying,,, No more sex until... Bad advice in my opinion. Never use sex as a weapon is my mantra.
If one does not want a biker for a boyfriend, DTMF and let him find someone who does.

Dan never told WIMP to with hold sex. The example Dan gave involved physical contact with the item in question, which just happen to be on Terry's face. He simply stated that she is in control of what SHE does, not her boyfriend. Meaning that she can refuse to ride the bike, have it at her house, look at pictures of him on it or hear anything about it. I'm a woman, and my first leap with his advice was not to use sex as a weapon; rather I used my brain to apply the advice to the question at hand - all of YOU jumped to sex. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Okay, and I'll sign on to the mustache thing: If Dan was not completely sardonic in that post, he sucks.

I don't care for mustaches: when my husband of two decades grew a mustache and beard I stated I liked cleanshaven better but he'd done plenty of stuff for me, I could tolerate the mustache. (Helped that he asked someone about kissing without scratching: he ducked his head so he was moving up rather than down when our lips met.) After a month or so he shaved.

If he wanted a motorcycle, I'd let him have one after expressing any worries. He'd be as careful or not with it as he is with other things (driving while talking to his mom, bike commuting). Focusing in on the motorcycle seems like a symbol that's not as uniquely dangerous as the emotions suggest.

For CBH, I suggest googling futa or futanari. There is a wealth of hentai (Japanese animated porn)to explore this particular kink. Depending on how is wife thinks about it, there is also Second Life where all kinds of real life impossible kinks can be explored with the exception of sex with kids. Normalcy is highly overrated as long as life is in balance.

"Sex work and surrogate partner therapy are not the same."
Bullshit. Your therapy may concentrate on social interaction but if you provide therapy, are paid for that therapy and the therapy in any way involves sexual interaction with the patient then you are a sex worker.

Thank you, @8. I'm, always amazed by how many people think that with respect to automotive safety, slower=safer.

@53: Sounds like you're splitting hairs. Actually, I think some would actually prefer withheld sex to the insanely passive-aggressive scenario you just laid out there.

I've been thinking about the engineering aspect, and it strikes me that engineering departments can be difficult places for women in general, and competitive for everyone, and any sort of perception that you're getting ahead because of who you're having sex with would be particularly resented.

I can certainly come up with a scenario where a prof/student relationship might happen not to be a big problem, but outside of a thought experiment it's a lot harder to be sure. I much prefer a general "don't shit where you eat" policy myself.

Building on #20; motorcycles are much safer than scooters, which are underpowered as well as being under-visible. If your partner wants to ride a motorcyle, the parameters for negotiating are more appropriately in the "how will you keep yourself safe so I don't have justifiable anxiety attacks" category than in the "will you deprive yourself of something to prove you love me" category.

Your conversation should focus on a commitment to take driver safety and advanced rider training, to always wear protective gear including a helmet, to always drive sober, to get a bike that is properly sized, to maintain it well, etc. As a 20 year rider, I can say that mature and intelligent bikers who learn defensive riding skills do fine, whereas idiot (i.e. often young, male, and intoxicated) bikers die disproportionally.

@58 - actually vocalizing your displeasure/concerns about something in a relationship is the exact opposite of passive-aggression. If this scenario applied to me, I would tell him that I do not like motorcycles, he is scaring the crap out of me and if he wants to do it that is his decision, but I don't want to hear about it. That is not passive aggressive, it is honestly telling my partner how I feel. If the situation was reversed, I'd hope my partner would have the courtesy and respect to ask the same of me - and he DOES, btw. Communication is our #1 policy.

Additional advice for SSSH - if the faculty is in your department, you could get expelled and he could get fired. Be careful not to tell anyone and don't take any of his classes to avoid being accused of conflict of interest.

@61: What you suggest in this post sounds completely reasonable (if a little last-resort scenario). What you suggested in 53 was a complete and utter freeze-out on the subject that would have been so highly unpleasant they might as well be still arguing. If there's a way to allay the fears and concerns of the one partner without stifling the choice of the other (or the ability to share that choice), that should be the goal. I'm not arguing against communication- I'm arguing for quality of communication.

@59: Who says SSSH is female?

52-Just Around-- Yes, I have at times had money concerns. Why do you ask?

SSSH is female.

repete@64: Dan mentioned the possibility of pregnancy.

cockyballsup@69: huh? I can't make heads or tails of this comment. Where did children/spouses/family members come into the matter?

ran out of the ability to read all the comments, but....

first: i honestly don't see how a partner gets any say whatever in regards to bike-riding, or any other dangerous activity, so long as it only endangers themselves. and so long as they're using their own money, not household money. that's just fascism. while i'd understand 'i'm worried about you, please get good training, and for gods sake wear good gear (and jeans?! or shoes?!! not good enough. leather or kevlar is a must)... if someone said "you may not..." i would walk. every time. because that is abusive, and a violation of your autonomy.

second: i don't see what the 'but now there's a baby' whine is about. i think that it can only apply if a new mother is doing all the work by herself, in which case she's a solo mother, in which case you have no right to ask for anything at all from her and should probably just leave. my experience (two babies, shit-loads of crazy carryings on) was that at about two weeks post birth i couldn't wait any longer, and got back into sex. i don't know that penetration would be smart that early on, but after about six weeks it should be fine, if she feels like it. it is much easier to have kinky sex on the lounge floor(with or without extra's) when you have a 3 month old, or a 6 month old, than when you have a 2 or 4 year old. it's also easier to talk about stuff, because you don't need to wonder if they're listening. and it only gets harder as they get older. by the time they are 14, you do have to relocate if you don't want a grumpy teenager complaining about the noise!

Bad move on the student fucking the prof, Dan. That's a serious power imbalance going on. You should have told her to DTMFA.

@71: "i don't see what the 'but now there's a baby' whine is about. i think that it can only apply if a new mother is doing all the work by herself,"

You're just going to have to take our word for it that for a lot of people, lack of sleep kills desire, feeling like you're constantly leaking milk while trying and failing to nurse kills desire, being ripped and raw and bleeding in intimate places kills desire, the focus on the new little person rearranging your lives pushes a lot of things temporarily to the side while you figure out how to work with the new addition, and it takes a lot of people longer than two weeks to say "I can't wait any longer, let's hit the sheets!" Great that you were rarin' to go at that point, but just as not all babies convey "I love being in my baby bouncer so you can use two hands! Think I'll take a three hour nap now!" not all couples find sex appealing so fast.

I mean, some people go without sex for several weeks because their partner is stressed at work, pulling long hours, and deprived of sleep. Confident that things will balance out in a bit when work balances out. Temporarily too exhausted with other things for sex is not this bizarre state of affairs.

On a longer time scale, most women take something like nine months to get an approximation of their pre-baby hotness back. They feel more vulnerable, since there is another person whom they would have to support and "I can always live in my car" doesn't seem like an option any more. Pregnancy and right post child birth are not good times to launch "I'm not satisfied with just you any more and I would like to explore sex partners with penises." It may never be a good time for that--I'm definitely on the "please figure out all important kinks before marriage and children so your partner does not feel tricked and trapped" side, even while acknowledging that people change throughout life and can't predict how a decade or two earlier--but pregnant and new parent are extra vulnerable times and not a good "let's open the marriage" launch point.

You missed something with the FetLife dude...

ECKS---she doesn't know who you are now, but unless you make a new profile, you can't post pics without her finding out. So, unless you're going to write back, come clean and apologize, you need to register a new profile. Otherwise, she'll look you up later, see it's you, and tell everyone on the site what a creep you were.

"But does a sexual relationship between a student and a faculty member actually jeopardize the quality of the academic, living or working environment of the college community?"

Effin h*ll yes. Saying that as a prof who has gotten inconveniently "sick" on the day that senior colleague scheduled the subfield vote on who got our monetary prize: his undergraduate girlfriend, or a proverbial write-in candidate. the next year (same situation, different student girlfriend, who wrote ODES to him for god's sake!) I said I'd trust his decision and vote with him. One of them was flabbergasted to be refused progression in her program a bit later.

@73 - some very valid points. i would add, on my end of the balance sheet, that i would recommend never confusing 'relationships' with 'parenting'. goes a long way towards avoiding emotional mess once the babies are real rather than hypothetical.

@71 it's only fascism if she takes a baseball bat to the bike.

Also: kids can hear their parents' sex noises without being traumatized. Though of course grumpy complaints are par for the course with 14 year olds.

@40 - My advice as well. If he doesn't have pictures, chances are he hasn't done much with it yet. Delete the original FetLife account (or let it go dormant), create a new account, and steer clear of the ex on FetLife. Yes, they may run into each other in fetish circles and they've have to learn how to be civil, but there's no reason to "accidentally" run into each other or interact at all on FetLife.

@1:

Yes, but that's his problem, not hers. Nor Dan's. If it was the professor doing the asking, I'm sure that Dan would tell him to knock it the fuck off.

Hey Dan, would love to hear you talk about/respond to the idea of "surrogate partner therapy" - I looked it up as a result of this column. I don't think I'm buying it, personally. But what do you think?

I suspect that withholding affection or sex, even if it's justified or based on concern for the other person's safety, will lead to resentment at the very least.

@81: Someone close to me had a relationship with a professor. Most people seem preoccupied with the potential for abuse, presumably because they've had the social justice narrative mercilessly pounded into their skull as the universal explanation for everything. From what I've seen, however, I'm guessing in most cases the professors end up pulling strings for their lovers, possibly getting them into programs they might not otherwise have gotten into.

Is that an unfair advantage? Maybe, but if you do something worthwhile with the doors that were opened for you, then I'd say you lived up to the promise of those letters and therefore deserved them.

@71 "i honestly don't see how a partner gets any say whatever in regards to bike-riding, or any other dangerous activity, so long as it only endangers themselves. and so long as they're using their own money, not household money. that's just fascism."

Being in a LTR with someone who increases tremendously your risks of widowhood is something that must be carefully considered. Widowhood is a major trauma. Someone may well have a price of admission of "no dangerous activities". If the partner changes mind later on, then the relationship should be reevaluated, and if necessary, ended. I think that's what Dan is advicing for.

@87 Riiight. Hey, female students, go sleep with faculty ! Since the doors are so narrow that only a few will pass, increase your luck by prostituting yourself up for grades !

Faculty who prohibit relationships between student and staff don't do it out of concern for the welfare of the young ones, you know. They just want their campus not to become a huge fuckfest resulting in too many low-quality graduates damaging their reputation.

As for doing something worthwile with the doors that were open to you, I distinctly remember this trick who had married her 30+ years older something-in-medicine teacher. He was a very good scientist, she was as dumb as an ox but had a killer body. Still she was provided with a research job, but in another department - probably not to seem too nepotistic. It was lucky for her, it provided her with unobstrued access to another, younger scientist, to occupy the long boring hours between two phone calls to her nanny and other hired help at home. The department openly wondered which, of the husband and the lover, had fathered her child.

@88: Hey, sissoucat. I was arguing earlier (not in 71) against the method of discourse between WIMP and the boyfriend, not the need for it. WIMP has legitimate concerns that should be addressed. But withholding sex or affection to achieve that is a greased slide to a permanently resentful and poisoned relationship. Actually addressing those concerns (take a safety class, exercise extreme caution, generally avoid doing dumb shit with your new toy) seems a lot fairer and healthier.
@89: Agreed. It's unfair to the general campus and that specific class. I don't see the big deal if she's not actually taking instruction from him, aside from the code issue. But overall no, it's not a good look (if you care about those things). Playing with fire and then some right there.

People have a right to use whatever vehicle they want and are legally permitted to operate.

But people also have a right not to be in a relationship with someone who's excessively likely to die. One word: donorcycle.

Besides, a motorcycle in this climate is absurd. Even if we ignore the whole 'yeah enjoy riding it for like five months' thing, Canadians have this habit of treating the first slightly warm day of the year like it's full out spring (I myself decided that last weekend was miniskirt weather). Then when it drops back down to the depths of winter a few days later people are reluctant to put away their shorts, their patio chairs, their motorcyles. Shit ain't safe.

@80, 88, 91 - mm, no. can't agree. this may be a cultural issue, but there is no way this is ok. i'm not saying it doesn't happen, but being someone's partner does not allow you to rob them of their self-determination. this is a basic right. of course you can leave, you have that right, but that is a little bit juvenile. so they might die? people die all the time. it's a fact of life. that this will impact on you gives you absolutely no say in the matter.
...ok, i'm guessing it's cultural, because it's not just one of you, :-) and i just can't fathom where you're coming from....

also... right there with 92 and 93.

The other problem with unrestricted relationships between profs and students is that it changes the atmosphere for everyone. People often interact in quite a different way with those who are considered potential sexual partners than they do with those who are considered off limits, regardless of whether they ever get to the point of having a relationship. It can be extremely uncomfortable to be in a sexualized workspace, even for people who are uninvolved.

Jesus Christ, leave the guy who wants a motorcycle alone. One of the few pleasures left in life.

Dan,

I've given you a few chances, but now I'm done with you. Like Mr Darcy, my good opinion, once lost, is lost forever. And, so it shall be.

I've tolerated your inebriated, medicinal ramblings. Your lack of taking your position of influence, and relative power to positively affect someone's life and well being serious. Do any of your readers come to work after using drugs, and alcohol? Participating in the exchange of honest work, for honest pay? Maybe so. Everyone would agree it's not the right thing to do. A mature adult wouldn't really behave in that fashion.

I gave you a pass - after a brief time - after the advice you gave to a young lady. You told her to LIE to her boyfriend about being pregnant, to find out his reaction to pregnancy. Your advice was to lie? A thing so wrong you were immediately called out. You back peddled like the feckless, wanna be columnist you are. However, with this latest bit, I've had enough.

Your advice to WIMP is to withhold physical affections, and interactions because her partner is doing something she doesn't approve of. Really? That's the best you can do? Your advice stems from something you've actually done. One must only think you've engaged in this manipulative, destructive behavior in the past. So you will do again, no doubt, in the future.

Surely, all of the readers have to immediately see how wrong this advice actually is. You suggest that, just because you don't like or agree with something, to withhold affection from that person until the behavior or said grievance changes. Is that the best you can do for someone you care for? For someone you've agreed to share your life with? For someone who you've stood up, in the face of family and friends, and said I'm going to be with THIS person, and THIS person alone because they make my soul happy? Is this how you treat someone you LOVE? You claim to care, but you will remove, and refuse the very basic act of loving, caring, and nurturing another person's need - again, the one person you claim to care for above all others - over a petty grievance. Refusing the very basic need of all humans to be loved, cared for, and accepted as who we are as individuals is wrong by any stretch of the imagination. Surely, any intelligent reader will see how misguided and wrong your advice really is.

My sadness isn't for you, or your partner. If he's still with you after this, it's his fault. My sadness is for the child that is being brought up in an obvious toxic environment.

I'm done. No more of your column. Your books. Anything to do with you. I think you're well past you sell by date. My hope is that your supporters in Seattle, your readership, and anyone else that has before supported your endeavors, re-examine what you actually promote.

Dan,

I've given you a few chances, but now I'm done with you. Like Mr Darcy, my good opinion, once lost, is lost forever. And, so it shall be.

I've tolerated your inebriated, medicinal ramblings. Your lack of taking your position of influence, and relative power to positively affect someone's life and well being serious. Do any of your readers come to work after using drugs, and alcohol? Participating in the exchange of honest work, for honest pay? Maybe so. Everyone would agree it's not the right thing to do. A mature adult wouldn't really behave in that fashion.

I gave you a pass - after a brief time - after the advice you gave to a young lady. You told her to LIE to her boyfriend about being pregnant, to find out his reaction to pregnancy. Your advice was to lie? A thing so wrong you were immediately called out. You back peddled like the feckless, wanna be columnist you are. However, with this latest bit, I've had enough.

Your advice to WIMP is to withhold physical affections, and interactions because her partner is doing something she doesn't approve of. Really? That's the best you can do? Your advice stems from something you've actually done. One must only think you've engaged in this manipulative, destructive behavior in the past. So you will do again, no doubt, in the future.

Surely, all of the readers have to immediately see how wrong this advice actually is. You suggest that, just because you don't like or agree with something, to withhold affection from that person until the behavior or said grievance changes. Is that the best you can do for someone you care for? For someone you've agreed to share your life with? For someone who you've stood up, in the face of family and friends, and said I'm going to be with THIS person, and THIS person alone because they make my soul happy? Is this how you treat someone you LOVE? You claim to care, but you will remove, and refuse the very basic act of loving, caring, and nurturing another person's need - again, the one person you claim to care for above all others - over a petty grievance. Refusing the very basic need of all humans to be loved, cared for, and accepted as who we are as individuals is wrong by any stretch of the imagination. Surely, any intelligent reader will see how misguided and wrong your advice really is.

I'm done. No more of your column. Your books. Anything to do with you. I think you're well past you sell by date. My hope is that your supporters in Seattle, your readership, and anyone else that has before supported your endeavors, re-examine what you actually promote.

By not speaking out against you, what does that say about your supporters? What does that say about their values? Do they feel as you do? Will they also throw Love and the responsibilities of a partnership aside in order to be right? Will they also devalue Love with such base actions? Such careless behavior? Will they also agree it's right to manipulate and control their partners? Their LOVED ones?

A similar choice of reference, but a different user. And that post isn't really in my style.

Someone who withholds sex as punishment for something that has nothing to do with the sexual part of their relationship deserves to have the monogamy clause in their relationship instantly voided.

I'm not sure Dan's mustache story would rise to that level of offense. That usually consists of "No way am I going to kiss that!" so it is reasonably cause-and-effect. (Also, presumably it can be shaved off in five minutes, thereby instantly restoring the "damaged" libido. But absolutely no recriminations allowed once it's off.) But withholding sex for buying a motorcycle? You just lost all right to demand _anything_ sexually.