Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Check the expiration on the condom wrapper. Per her story, she only used them for sex toys. She got rid of the sex toy before she met her boyfriend but kept condoms in case she met someone. They are LIVING together 2 years so presumably they have been together for longer, one would think 3 years or more and the condoms pre-date boyfriend.
Look at serial number and expiration. Old expired condoms, she has an alibi. Fresh batch, on the other hand....
If I were to find an unused condom in the guest room, I'd probably think Hmm, I guess some previous guest didn't have sex after all.
Did anyone detect a spike of male applicants in those fields?
It's true that we donât know how long it had been since they had sex, before that night when he got âvery upset.â And we donât know how often she has these crazy work weeks. And we donât know exactly what âvery upsetâ means.
But if he made you stay awake to fight with him, I would serious doubt your compatibility with a boyfriend who throws a fit during your stressful work week to punish you for not having sex with him. I would make the Fleshlight a parting gift.
He think you not made of flesh.. He think that going to this hulk of a man, with his ropes and pulleys would just be like a visit to the dentist. Well, fool him.
I do sympathize with the boyfriend's feelings of hurt, especially if LW is the one into bondage, and he's just obliging. But still, cheating is a very strong word, and the boyfriend is using it lightly here.
@10: I'd agree with you that WHAT should end the relationship. This is an "ongoing problem"; he isn't satisfied with the plentiful compromise of four to five times a week; and he can't give her a break during a temporary period of overwork and tiredness? DTMFA. Plenty of guys would kiss the ground you walk on for 4-5 times a week sex, as we've read in recent comments.
@14: I was about to jump in and defend HEMP, then I re-read the letter, and have now interpreted the situation as: HEMP is the bondage aficionado; she asked BF to tie her up, but he didn't have any experience, so the whole "let's train you up" was her idea, and for her benefit, not his. From that perspective, I can see that she was maybe too enthusiastic about the whole thing. If BF was a reluctant bondage top who was merely trying to be GGG, it's not surprising that he was overwhelmed by the situation and overreacted to her obvious enjoyment. I think they need to talk more about whether bondage is his thing, and take it at a slower pace. Instructional videos maybe?
Now, in the spirit of Homocentric August, when (as I don't recall your being a regular here) I go as far as possible to presume letters and their writers to be SS, I'll note that the interesting thing about L3 is that there's almost nowhere different to go if the letter is SS than if it's OS, which is a bit unusual. Most non-gendred letters give me a hook; this doesn't. I can perhaps wonder whether standards for libido difference are more lenient in OS relationships, but that feels a bit below par. Ah, well.
I had no idea such a thing existed!
Also: @19 +1 - that's another real possibility.
By the way, to be fair, this is largely not a gendred issue. In fact, the most outrageous examples I've seen have gone the other way - at least three occasions on which someone has made a reference to a convicted rapist or murderer and in so doing called him "the gentleman who [did X]". One would think that there would be consensus about rape and murder being off the table for gentle conduct, even if a serious defence could be mounted for the immature and manipulative conduct you mention as being not incompatible with the L or G word.
think dan really minimize the BF's perspective and behavior. Relationships are all about trust, respect and acceptance. The guy's insecurity is real. Two years together is not a life time with another person. I think the guy will come around, but don't force it. Most people no matter how fluid and open about personal histories don't want to find or be reminded of past relationships with expired props.
I was a bed wetter/sleep walker for most of my first 12 years and the psychological damage it does to a person is huge. If this guy cant be sympathetic about something OVER WHICH YOU HAVE NO CONTROL???? :.. IMHO DTMFA.
Re LW3 sheesh. I got married when I was 19 and did not have sex 5 times a week. I am reminded of Woody Allen in Annie Hall where each partner is seeing a psychiatrist:
Woody:... "We hardly ever have sex, Maybe 3 times a week"
Then you see Annie in her Dr's office: "He ALWAYs wants sex:..it's like 3 times a week"
http://willowhavenoutdoor.com/wp-content…
Cool.
I don't agree, mostly because people don't get to choose their turn-ons.
I applaud your ability to apply judgment that isnât based on the personâs genitalia. I hope this week doesnât turn into a gang male bashing, considering the letters selection as well as the already-celebrated ape illustration.
Venn @ 18
I was also wondering if the bed wetter is a male, but after last week was a bit reluctant to bring up the subject.
Her boyfriend is accusing her of having an orgasm, because then he gets to throw the word "cheating" around, whereas otherwise he would just have to own up to his feelings: "What you experienced looked really intense and I'm feeling insecure about our relationship now."
I'm not defending her -- she clearly was unsatisfied with her BF's efforts and didn't care about his feelings when she set up the "gift" of these classes. I agree with Dan that their relationship is over. But the alleged orgasm is a red herring.
The only way I can see this being unfair for him is if HEMP didn't tell him where they were going, and just dragged him there and went "Surprise! Today we're going to learn how YOU can make yourself good enough for ME." The way HEMP describes it, it definitely sounds more like an insecurity issue to me.
@32, she didn't say she orgasmed, she said she shuddered. I don't know about you, but it's a pretty natural reaction for me to shudder if a stranger touches me unexpectedly, especially if I can't see them or they have cold hands.
And as a partial aside... perhaps Dan should come up with an alternative acronym from DTMFA for these instances. The BF being overwhelmed by the situation and throwing out the word cheating is certainly a sign of them being incompatible...but it hardly makes him a motherfucker.
In any case, I think she should call his bluff and dump him already. If bondage is that important to her, they're not a good match anyways.
men want their women hot but not too hot? A bubble of sex on legs, but only on Thursdays.
I get the impression that HEMP assured her boyfriend that this wasn't going to be a sexual experience, and he believed her, and felt betrayed when her physical responses made it clear that it was. He's acting exactly how people act when that happens.
Not mentioned in the letter: How she sold the idea to the boyfriend, and/or how reluctant he was--or, really, any mention of his feelings at all.
HEMP: Feelings. You know people have those, right? Even dudes.
That said, I've seen this sort of behaviour so often that I'd call it "educated speculation".
@ 41 - Having consented to taking the classes (as we must presume from the contents of the letter), he should have known that this might happen, and adjust his expectations accordingly. He has a right to his feelings, but as an adult, he also has an obligation to control them to a certain extent in view of the specific situation.
Or do you think something about being male means you're not allowed to not like things? Asking someone with power to silence people with boring opinions like "ethics apply to everyone" is pretty standard for that type. Disappointing.
I also don't understand those who get offended at the suggestion that they might have cheated. Are they not human?
As for those who say "Relationships are about trust", brilliant! I'll file that under Platitudes right next to "There is no I in team". As it turns out, actual relationships are about a quite lot things, some of which even contradict each other.
As for the practical matter of this relationship, obviously, the boyfriend needs to move on for it to continue. Towards that end, reassure him, don't pathologize him, and give it a little time. If that doesn't work, dump him.
Leave this boy in the dust.
There is a lot to speculate about...but the end result is that it was too much for him. He saw a side of her that intimidated the hell out of him. Using the word "cheating" is overdoing it. But vilifying him is overdoing it too.
Although I do wonder how she presented the idea to him, and how that all played out. It would be one thing if it were, 'this is something I want *you* to do to me, but we need to make sure we're safe', and 'God, you were utter crap at that I guess you need lessons so I can get off properly'.
He didn't DTMFA, so now HEMP needs to DTMFA. When you think your partner's screwed you over, the correct response is to leave, not to stay and wallow in bitterness. People who stay when they can't really stay usually turn into motherfuckers.
[Possible exceptions for very long-term, high-commitment relationships that might get better. This one's neither, though.]
People in pain don't tend to act like paragons of rationality. Especially if they feel like they've just been blindsided.
He could have seen how turned on she was and enjoyed her enjoying it.
Thinking how he wants to get her home, and see that same delight when he had the ropes.
men want their women hot, only with them though. Men, thru their own sexuality.. Know that one's hot sex is fueled by lots of people, stories.. Yet they expect their women to just have it for them?
That's how I read it. Giving him a gift that was really about her pleasure was a very selfish thing to do. And doing it after only one experience of him tying her, rather than giving him some time to play around and see if he wanted to learn more about rope -- both selfish and short-sighted of her.
Yeah fucking right. He snooped, and my have thought this before. If he was sick, why was he moving nightstands around? What a douchenozzle.
You'd also be a dick boyfriend if you agreed to the terms and reneged. A safety instructional is not a sex act in itself.
Like women who burst in tears when having a painful conversation with their BF, you mean?
True! But it sure looks that way. She gave us no reason to think he wasn't and he's definitely acting like he was. So we have some reason to think he was, and no reason to think he wasn't.
"And not that I've ever been to a professional bondage session, but I find it hard to believe that there wouldn't have been some kind of signal or safeword for either of them to employ if it got to be too much."
Oh yeah. Because everyone treats the feelings of male partners as significant. Why, just look at this threat! ...In which almost zero people are doing that.
@64: "A safety instructional is not a sex act in itself."
He was probably told that, yes, given that he freaked out on seeing that it was an intensely sexual act and realized that it wasn't true. People don't like being lied to, especially when the lie was "What I'm gonna do with this other person ain't sex."
@69: Correct. You probably think you're pulling off a "gotcha" by pretending not to know that this has nothing in common with someone considering a plan to break out in strategically-useful tears. I'm not joining you in pretending that; sorry.
In case it even needs repeating, someone acting badly when in sudden pain has nothing in common with someone who is making a plan to act badly in order coerce someone else.
We know, you remain massively obtuse about your willful misread. That's the joke!
Actually... strike that... this conversation has long past reached the beat a dead horse phase.... lol
Still, having put forth the possibility that he was manipulating her, I do realize that it is just that, a possibility, and I don't think it's worth my while to get into a fight about it.
As this was a class, this wasn't a "scene", he's free to speak up and these no concern for "breaking" anything.
Honestly, here it sounds like the guy was primarily insecure that he was doing it wrong initially and got angry that some other guy could "do it better".
That's another interesting possibility. Hopefully Eudaemonic is reading all this.
I think him insisting she had an orgasm and calling her a cheater after he agreed to the session is pretty assholish.
Break up, you're not well-suited. Or, you know, stay together and spare the single population.
I don't invalidate his feelings, I can understand what he might have experienced. Just don't choose to make his feelings the most important aspect of the story. And, if he wasn't such a baby, his feelings might reflect a bit more of an adult response.
Personally, I think that accusing her of cheating is assholish beyond doubt. Other than that, everything else is pure speculation, including and most definitely on my part.
#93 puts a more charitable spin on my scenario. You're so much nicer than me BiDanFan :P