Savage Love Aug 3, 2016 at 4:00 am

Pokémon No


If the massage guy is actually an LMT, you could report him to whatever regulatory board applies in your state. Think carefully about how you word the complaint if you don't want to rat him out for sex work, but just for making creepy comments. Or maybe just do word-of-mouth negative referrals.
LW1- I’m afraid your marriage is indeed doomed. Your approach to life seems to differ sharply than that of your husband, and whatever it is that he likes may also mean that he would rather do it without you.

LW2 – You must be guilty for your breakup as it is. The angry wife is sensing your vulnerability and found out she can also attack you on some long ago and possibly unrelated behavior.
I suspect it’s not the first time she’s done it, and it may be another form of emotional blackmail. Reach out to LW 1.

LW3- A no means no and you did the right thing. Team up with LW’s 1 and 2 for an agreed upon fun.

LW4- “I saw a sex worker for a legit sensual massage.” How interesting, I only see sex workers for legit plumbing issues.
And just so you know, Dan was right about the tea.
Re: Flags "I saw a sex worker for a legit sensual massage." I believe that, by definition, anything qualified with the word "legit" isn't. Thanks though, Dan, for not conflating body-work with sex-work. Much appreciated.

Re: USA! USA!, Dan, I like your reply but admire your restraint. I feel compelled to note that among the many classic porn tropes at play in that scenario, the facial of all things turned out to be the deal-breaker! Wow, I didn't see that, uh, coming.
No adult who's into Pokémon Go deserves any consideration. Drop him now.
"where we urbanites drink only hot tea, snort only in derision, and use only condoms religiously" best answer joke in ages, kudos to Dan

"USA! USA!" most topical sign off acronym right after RNC, DNC; kudos to LW
@myself "right after" get it? RNC went way to the RIGHT of their usual fascism, racism and homophobia, anti-science into ultra-fascist racist homophobic nutjobland, and DNC went to the RIGHT of their usual neoliberal "center" position into the land where conservatives were a few decades ago (sigh) -- I know, lesser of two evils and the DNC platform is pretty progressive, Michelle's speech was amazing, but a lot of the rhetoric by many others was a tad nationalistic
LW1: Neither of you are acting like you like each other! At first I assumed that this was going to be about him spending a lot of time with that specific friend more than about him liking to play a Pokemon game, but the second paragraph has nothing to say about the friend and everything to say about how Pokemon Go is a stupid activity and playing it with him would be enabling some sort of unhealthy behavior.

What he's doing wrong is hanging out with this friend constantly when it makes you uncomfortable for him to be doing that, but I doubt he's having an affair - even an emotional one - because he keeps asking you to come along, too. If he's spending an unreasonable amount of time on the game and never having time to do things you like with you (I can't tell if "until 5 AM" is unreasonable in this case because it seems like one or both of you works at night, and that's going to skew both of your perceptions of what times it's reasonable to be awake), that's also not great. He doesn't seem to be considering how you honestly don't have time for this - again, something he could do a little better at. But it's fine if he really likes a thing you don't like at all, and he's not the only one choosing doing what he feels like doing over spending time together. You're not only drawing a hard limit at playing Pokemon, you're also not even considering a compromise where you do the same activity at a time you can manage while he plays Pokemon and you don't - and of course you have the right to set a hard limit about Pokemon activities if you really don't want to do them, but in the same sense, he has the right to keep playing Pokemon even if you're telling him not to.

There's a difference between not being interested in an activity and thinking an activity has no merit because you're not interested in it. Dan is right that the problem probably isn't really about Pokemon, but I'd be surprised if this is the first time you disapproved of something he liked, and he proceeded to do it without you. If you were my partner, I'd be avoiding you, too. It's past time you talked to your husband about how you want to handle non-shared hobbies, and I suspect that if you have this conversation with him without judging him for wanting to do things he likes, he'll be much more willing to negotiate with you. If you don't think you can be part of a marriage where non-shared hobbies are an important part of each other's lives, then it's time to decide whether you can both be happy remaining married to each other.

Oh, and hopefully you're aware that there's a difference between "people should be considerate about constantly spending time with friends their partners feel threatened by" and "people shouldn't be allowed to have friends their partners feel threatened by" and "anyone who's the gender my partner likes and not hideous is a threat."
PGMN: I'm surprised there was no actual advice here. Wait the craze out and then see? They will still have differing work schedules meaning they get no time together, and he still won't have apologised for his blatant disregard of her feelings. It appears she married a child. That's never a good indicator of a lasting relationship.

NCA: I'll reprint my comment from the SLLOTD:
There's no need to disclose, but there's also no need to keep this a secret. I would say to disclose that you cheated when cheating comes up as a topic of conversation with said future partner. When you're close to someone, you should be able to talk about past mistakes and what you learned from them -- and it sounds like NCA did learn from it. I'd have a lot more trust in someone who was mature enough to admit to screwing up and learning than someone who sat there and listened while I talked about my prior screw-ups, but didn't own up to their own.

USA! USA!: Gee, someone else using the term unicorn "wrong." So many people in need of educating. USA, you're right to revoke their threesome card. Find a different couple who respect your limits. Fuck that guy, or more accurately, don't fuck that guy.

FLAGS: I wonder why Dan thinks most sex workers would oppose a licensing board?
Saxfanatic @3: Have you ever had cum in your eye? Facials are a dealbreaker for me, too. They're just... eww. I once asked a particularly experienced partner if his other lovers were willing to receive facials, and he said only the one who was into being humiliated. LW's dealbreaker is perfectly reasonable.
PGMN-- Dan's answer, while technically correct, surprised me. I thought he'd tell you to try the pokemon thing at least once. I'd compare it with any other GGG activity. Maybe you're not into giving blowjobs, but you do it now and then because he's into it, and in return, he does something you particularly like despite his disinterest. Pokemon doesn't seem to be sexual in this instance, but isn't the principle the same? I mean, if he's not getting what he wants with his wife, shouldn't he have permission to get it some of the time with someone else?

But then we get to PGMN's sentence about last straws which makes me think that she's not paying enough attention to all the preceding straws-- in which case, marriage over.
Hunter @10: You'll have to ask Alison. She's the one who gave me the slapdown for using the term exactly the way USA and Dan use it.…
Pokemon @5 am with a good looking younger woman, pull the other one. Unless they are hidden in some hotel room.
LW1, this man has left the relationship with you. Gather your pride, and DTMFA.
Look, I conceded the point last week, but since Dan brought it up again, I'll just point out that I'm not the first person to question the definition of unicorn. This from the January 31, 2012 Savage Love LOTD: "I had a conversation recently with a friend in which we observed that the term "unicorn" doesn't even accurately apply to bi women anymore—single, hot, up-for-threesomes bi women—because they seem so common these days." And in another LOTD that same month, Dan discussed an FMF threesome with a couple that had scoured Craigslist until they found "their unicorn ... woman who is everything we’re looking for..." Blatantly Irritated from July 2, 2014 also argued "there is no shortage of women to have threesomes with; they are not mythical beasts that nobody has ever seen." There are probably others, but I'm not searching the archives all day.

In any event, USA!USA! did absolutely the right thing. Took a specific sex act off the table in clear terms, and then shut down that relationship when the husband went for it anyway.
@7: Until 5am? Him asking her to maybe also show up now and then doesn't preclude that he's not catching... them all.
That was a terrible use of negatives. Anyway, point being that ignoring her for someone until the wee hours of the morning is a bad sign regardless of the game, and I doubt this will end when he's bored of it. Plenty of marriages ended over World of Warcraft flings as well.

@5: I wonder how the both of them could hang out in public parks for so long after sundown without getting in trouble with law enforcement anyway.
Schrodinger's Unicorn: She simultaneously exists and doesn't.
Is no one here a gamer? Really? Gamers love it if/when their partners share their interests, or at least are willing to keep an open mind about it. I'm a lifelong gamer myself, and my husband and I are always sharing games or looking for co-op games to play together. Especially with games like Fallout, where your experiences differ depending on how you play the game, we often talk about the moral choices we made, favorite weapons to use, and what side quests were found/resolved.

I find it problematic that PGMN dismisses what her husband obviously enjoys (and invites her to participate in as well) as "walking around staring at a phone." Yes, Pokemon GO involves a lot of that, but it's not like you have to walk around with your eyes glued to the phone. You can still talk, interact, and enjoy being together until the next pokemon shows up or you get to a gym. I see plenty of groups of people in my area, even couples, walking around and having fun together while playing Pokemon GO. Having someone to share it with is part of the fun, but it doesn't sound like she even gave it a chance. She doesn't even have to play, just accompany him like they're just taking a walk together. If he completely ignores her even then, then her concerns would be a lot more justified.

Of course, even more problematic is that the husband is ignoring her concerns and unhappiness. It's hard to tell from the letter if he's actively being mean to her, or if he simply doesn't understand how big of a deal this is to her. He may not even realize how much he's neglecting chores around the house. I'm not necessarily defending the husband here, since I don't know either of them, I'm just looking at it from the perspective of someone who's married to someone that does the same things PGMN's husband does (i.e. not responding to emotional questions, not understanding why I sometimes "don't want to do anything" etc). It's usually not out of malice or disregard for my feelings, he just can't always tell if I'm just blowing off steam or trying to initiate a conversation because I really am upset about something (sorry guys, but a lot of you really aren't very perceptive about these things!). I could be wrong and the husband is just a huge neglectful douche. But I'd suggest a conversation that starts with "I'd love to go Pokemon hunting with you, but I just have too much going on at home. If you do [X] chores, that would be really helpful, and I'd have more time and energy to hang out with you" and see what he says and does. I know my husband would be more than happy to do a few extra chores around the house if it meant we could go out and have fun together afterwards.
While I have no interest in any form of Pokemon I have to wonder, couldn't you say this about any interest your partner has that you don't: "I don't think me enabling his actions by joining the game is the answer,...."

I feel the same way about theatre but I still go with my wife to plays and even find ones to take her to. I'm pretty sure she hikes with me a lot more than she would on her own.
I don't agree with Dan putting all of the blame/responsibility on LW1's husband in this situation.

I have been LW1's husband - I spent a lot of time with an attractive early-20's woman 12 years my junior. And there was a time when the wife was upset about it, and I honestly said the same thing LW1's husband said: You don't want to go out and do anything - and it was true, she didn't. She wanted to come home from work and sit around the house. It's quite possible that LW1's husband really does want to get out and do things and his wife doesn't. That's not his fault.

The real issue LW1 has is that she feels threatened that the person who does want to go out and do things with her husband is apparently younger and perceived to be more attractive than her.

Fortunately there are solutions:

1) LW1 should decide how much time she wants to spend with her husband, and schedule that time.
2) Outside of that time, LW1 needs to stop maligning what activities her husband decides he is interested in and the people he decides to do them with.
3) LW1 should get to know her husband's younger friend. This was key in my situation - once my wife knew my friend well, my wife's perception of my younger friend changed from "younger, attractive threat" to "friend who keeps my husband out of trouble".
@15: It sounds like they work opposite shifts, and LW1's shift is the day shift, so 5 AM may be a very reasonable time for her husband to be out (i.e. if he works night shifts, that's when he's normally awake and working.)
History of unicorns: native to poly country but naturalized elsewhere.

The earliest online reference I could find to a poly unicorn is Mama Java from February 2008:…

The word “unicorn” appears in the title only, not in the text.

Then joreth elaborates on the theme in May 2008:…

There is often a debate in online venues about the Unicorn, the Holy Grail of polyamory. Also known as the "mythical" HBB or Hot Bi Babe, this is the bisexual female that a married male-female couple is seeking to be their magical "third", the person who will "complete" them by developing equal emotional and sexual relationships with both members of the couple, who likes kids, is willing to help raise the couple's kids but not come with any of her own, willing to move out of her house (or city, or state) to move into the couple's house, and basically give up her entire life to fit herself into theirs. The couple's sacrifices include buying a bed big enough for all 3 of them (because there is no consideration that she might want her own bed or that any of them might want some "alone" time in the future) but otherwise the couple's life goes on as is with little change. The reason for the "mythical" terms is not because bisexual women don't exist, but because this specific kind of bisexual woman is unlikely to exist and the quest for such is about as fruitful as seeking the Grail or unicorn is.

The first Dan Savage print use I could find was this one from March 2010:…

It sounds like you two did absolutely everything right: you hashed out all the details, you set ground rules advance, and you hired a pro instead of waiting years for an unattached bi girl/unicorn to come along.

Note that Dan’s couple don’t refer to their third as a unicorn. They are not polyamorous and the context is completely different from the poly problem described by Mama Java and joreth.

RationalWiki credit Dan Savage with inventing the term but don't give a date or citation:…

Unicorn: A bisexual or bicurious woman who is into threesomes with couples. So named because of their apparent rarity.

*** *** ***
Someone who is more familiar with the poly lit can probably dig up the ‘online venues’ joreth refers to.

I actually think that Dan has done harm by promoting ‘unicorn’ as a general term for an HBB down for a casual threesome. The women who originally created the term are poly women themselves and were trying to point out the ridiculousness of the expectations that poly women regularly face. They are tedious for experienced poly women to constantly disabuse shiny het couples of, and they are potentially dangerous for inexperienced poly women.

Though it was perhaps inevitable. Being a unicorn is very special, and lots of HBBs claim the title happily.
We all know that no good ever came of Pokemon in any form. H1 ought to do penance by going out in public as Dark Magician Girl, a character ever popular with Wainthropps, and often for rather perverted reasons.

LW2, just embroider a nice, big scarlet C on all your clothing and see who figures it out and who doesn't.

Unicorn, the next time you enjoy a couple, just make sure they're both bottoms.

LW4 seems to have gotten trapped in a Blur song.
"They are tedious for experienced poly women to constantly disabuse shiny het couples of, and they are potentially dangerous for inexperienced poly women."

Het couples wouldn't generally be down for threesomes, since that would require one of the partners to sleep with someone they're not into.

Not that unicorn hunting couples in the classic sense aren't a massive annoyance. I just find it interesting that they're so often characterized as straight, and something that exists to annoy bi women, when the female half of these couples are also bi. Often vociferously so.
PGMN: Pokemon Go is largely an excuse to get out, walk around, and explore the local area.

If your hubby were wrapped up in a more passive video gaming hobby, there'd be different conversations to be had about him making sure that you got your fair share of time and attention. But as it stands, you two need to have talks about together time and making sure that your schedules and energy levels sync better.

The co-worker is a red herring here. The real issue is that together time and mutually enjoyable activities have become a stress point. Focus on that, see what solutions you can come to, and the rest of your issues should flow from how well that does or does not resolve.

USA!USA!: I just want to add that "The couple thinks I'm overreacting and that a load in your face should be a forgivable offense" clinches the deal. It might have been forgivable if there were an honest apology about something that happened in the heat of the moment, and they were willing to work to rebuild trust. But when both of them tell you that you should overlook a boundary violation, that's a clear sign that you're right to get far away.

FLAGS: Don't suburbs usually imply closeness to urbs? Unless your whole metropolitan area is full of scumbags, there should be non-suburban folks to hook up with.

If it's a more general thing that the people you meet/wind up with tend to have deeper issues, there might be more than just your location at work. Look at the types of people you've hooked up with and how you've met them. If it's something about you that tends to attract/be attracted to messed up individuals, it might be worth figuring out how to attract healthier people. And then possibly experimenting to see what sorts of FWBs you can find to fill the time until you move.
Chi @26: I'll take "het" as an abbreviation of "heteroflexible" in this context.

Alison @24: Thank you for your detailed and non-condescending explanation of the origin of the term unicorn.

Speaking as someone who has lived as both an openly bi and poly person and in traditional long-term OS relationships: Have you considered that it is as difficult for shiny mostly-het couples to find a bi woman to fuck them as it is for poly couples to find a bi woman to share their lives with them? So both groups have equal standing to consider such creatures to be as rare as unicorns.

Back to Chi @26: Yes, one reason why finding a unicorn is difficult for socially het couples is that we bi women really don't want to go there with someone who's not into us. Or someone who's going to get jealous in the moment. Or someone who's going to side with her husband when he comes in our face after we've specifically said not to. Or someone who kicks us to the couch afterwards and then pretends not to know us at the next social gathering. The drama is not worth it, especially as there are other ways of getting group sex if that's what we want.
@9, BiDanFan: I take your point.
Based on @24/Alison Cummins research, it would appear that @msanonymous from the July 28 SLLOTD correctly identified the original meaning of "unicorn." And to the extent the definition changed over time, I have to agree with her conclusion as to why, "Though it was perhaps inevitable. Being a unicorn is very special, and lots of HBBs claim the title happily."
Not excusing the douche for not hearing the LW, it's just I have heard sperm is a very good moisturizer.
@27, Chi. The co worker is a red herring, you say. Not as I read it. Cosy 5am Pokemon hunts. If they haven't got to shenanigans, preoccupied as they may be by the little yellow fellow and his friends, it won't be long.
Anyway, this guy doesn't listen to his wife's concern. If he feels they don't share enough, this is not the way to bring it to her attention.
Thanks for explaining unicorn origins Alison.
ChiTodd @26: The couple is heterogeneous, or heterosexual, or mixed. It might be composed of a pansexual agender person and an asexual man. But there are two of them, and they have decided that only a bi woman will do.

BiDanFan @28: Have you considered that it is as difficult for shiny mostly-het couples to find a bi woman to fuck them as it is for poly couples to find a bi woman to share their lives with them? They both sound like snow leopards to me, not unicorns.

There are bi women in triads of some kind, just as there are HBBs down for a threesome. (Whether there's one for everyone is a different question.)

What makes the unicorn [poly meaning] is the length of the shopping list that the het couple have. They don't just wait until they meet someone really cool and work out something happy that reflects everyone's wants and needs, they have agreed between the two of them that they will impose very many very difficult restrictions unilaterally on a third person they haven't even met. They are in search of a very specific person who they are both attracted to, who is attracted to both of them and who will accept their restrictions without changing or complicating their lives in any way. Once they think they have found that person they will proceed to try to stuff her in their very uncomfortable box.

Either that or they come to realize that the very cool person they have met doesn't deserve that kind of treatment and they revise their expectations. They may still end up in a triad, but it is unlikely to be what they imagined.
Examples of the kinds of requirements that make a [poly] unicorn:
(note that any one of these requirements might be met, but meeting them all is so unlikely as not to be worth counting on)
• Both members of the couple find her attractive.
• She is attracted to both of them equally.
• She falls in love with both of them at the same time.
• She doesn't want any loves besides the two members of the couple.
• She won't create jealousy by having sex with either member of the couple alone, but always as a threesome.
• She's fine with the couple having couple sex though.
• She has no children and doesn't want any.
• She loves children and will be happy to share in parenting duties for the couple's children.
• She has no history of bad breakups.
• She will move in with the couple.
• She will not out the couple, but will be happy to pass herself off as an ordinary roommate and will be excluded from family functions.
• She will earn her own income and pay rent and all her own expenses.
• If either member of the couple falls out of love with her, the deal is off and she has to go. Quietly.
• If she stops wanting to have sex with either member of the couple, the deal is off and she has to go. Quietly.

So basically, yes, we understand why this is ideal for the couple. It's obvious why this shopping list keeps being reinvented by couple after couple. But giving up her own place and limiting the kinds of relationships she can form and making her homeless if things aren't perfect and pimping her ("No, you have to have sex with him even though you aren't into it, otherwise you can't have sex with me")... none of these things are ideal for her.

A friend's sister is very close to making the entire shopping list. Of the three adults, she's the only one with a full-time job and the only one with a driver's license but they live in the country, so she's responsible for paying the bills and doing all the shopping and the child-chauffeuring (not her biokids). They're out though -- everyone knows they're living as a triad, so she doesn't have to go somewhere else when they have family over. This actually makes things a bit tricky: her sisters worry about her being exploited, so she has to defend herself and her relationship. That makes it psychologically harder for her to leave or to stand up for herself even if she is being exploited.

Triads can be more equitable than this. If they are, the members are not [poly] unicorns.
@20/21: This isn't being a "gamer", this is ignoring spending time every day, for several hours a day (all night) and ignoring the partner.

I did the opposite shift for ~3 years, calling this a "hobby" or a "gamer" thing is a blowoff of the lack of consideration he feels for her. As many "gamers" may act towards their partners.

Falling back on that identity to justify personality flaws is not something I have any patience for. Find another game, find another hobby than a pay to win mobile game.
OMG Alison, no wonder they are called unicorns. Some couples try so hard to have it all. Funny people.
Your friend's sister is being exploited. Shame she won't see it.
Alison @34: No girl-on-girl-only sex, ever? I don't want a unicorn.
Sounds like those couples should get themselves a Real Doll.

Hunter @36: Who said she has to be younger? Seriously tired of ageism. And heterocentrism. Het women don't want unicorns; bi women in relationships with men do.
Hunter78 @36: No, where did you get that?

The common understanding right now is that a unicorn is a HBB having a great time guest starring with a cool couple she likes. They think she's wonderful and call her their unicorn; she's thrilled to be able to fulfil someone's fantasy while having such a great time and be their unicorn. Rainbows and sparkles all around! See this happy comic:…

This understanding completely erases any predatory-ness, which is why I want to preserve awareness of the history and origins of the term.

Yes, the rainbows and sparkles unicorn is totally legit! But she shouldn't completely distract us from the fantasy, couple-centred unicorn who distracts so many couples from the real, complicated relationships they could be having with real, complicated people.
Pokemon go has only been out for less than a month. Reading the letter it sounds like this has been going on for years. Can't someone be excited about a new game without it being a signal they want the relationship to end?
I'm not sure what USA!USA!'s issue to be resolved is. She had a line, it was crossed, and so she decided to move on (while allowing a possible sincere apology, which never came). This sounds like what a healthy, boundary & self-respecting person would do. What's the question?
Love "drink only tea, snort only in derision and use only condoms religiously." Waitaminit, how do you use a condom religiously? I mean, which religion is that?
@ 44 - When you have sex with underage choirboys, so as not to leave DNA traces.
Hunter @ 43
Playing HA aside, real life interactions are much more diverse and complicated then the way they may be depicted in different mediums, and often from a heterocentric male pov.

Still @ 44
“How do you use a condom religiously?” should be the real thing this week.
Following Ricardo, here is my take:
Place some coins inside and toss in the basket when it’s passed around.
@ 46 - It's also the perfect size for about a hundred hosts for ceremonies held outside the church.
LavaGirl and sb53: I really appreciate your wonderfully kind, and supportive emails.
This is really helping me to cope right now while the VA and my hopefully soon-to-be-ex healthcare provider (of what, I don't know) are battling "no coverage" wars concerning who I can get for a PTSD therapist, and how much comes out of my own pocket. Hopefully this gets resolved soon. I am having sleepless nights, ongoing waves of depression, and am pondering my contribution to society. What if Eve had come first? Would women worldwide evolve more loved, appreciated, and respected after millions of years?
Right now I wish my beloved little Love Beetle and I could just disappear peacefully and quietly together. Would the world ever remember us when we're gone? How big or small would our foot prints and tire tracks to future generations? How much good did we contribute (and I don't mean just in anyone's election campaign funds)?
Channeling WIley Miller and Flo!

@44 CMDwannabe: Great idea of yours and Ricardo's!, I never thought that when I was sexually active, and regularly using condoms I could be classified as religious. I like your coin idea---that would make quite a collection plate offering.
Grizelda, banish such thoughts. Are there vets support groups you could join? And it's my pleasure.
@ Ricardo 45 - is it being underage, or being a choirboy, that neutralizes the DNA?
@ CMD 46 - is that your take on rendering unto G-d that which is G-d's and rendering to Caesar that which is Caesar's?
@ Ricardo 47 - is that the regular size, or the deluxe? And doesn't holding a ceremony outside the church invalidate the ceremony?
@ Auntie Griz 48 - please find a friend to hang out with until this wave of depression passes over. And call a crisis line if it gets any worse. See a counselor. Don't get stuck in the place you are describing right now.
Hunter78 @43: The younger woman in the passage you quoted is not a unicorn. She is the gaming buddy of an LW's husband. The LW is not interested in sexing her. Therefore she is irrelevant to the unicorn discussion.

And a couple who want a bi woman, by definition, includes a bi woman. Otherwise, it's a man fulfilling a fantasy and a woman playing along. This does not fit either unicorn definition; she is defined as both their fantasy partner. That's the crux of the definition. Someone who is equally desired by both parties. That's why she's so hard to find. It's easier to find a woman who will play with a guy while his straight girlfriend GGGs along, usually in exchange for something she wants. "As far as the man is concerned, the 2 women playing with each other is for his entertainment." That's about the most heterocentric thing I've read.
@ 50 - "is it being underage, or being a choirboy, that neutralizes the DNA?"

It's the condom that prevents a whole lot of DNA from entering the boy's orifices. Not that pubic hair etc won't leave any, but it's less damning evidence if it's outside said orifices.

"doesn't holding a ceremony outside the church invalidate the ceremony?"

As a nearly life-long atheist, I can't tell you about those specifics, but I remember being subjected to simplified versions of mass when I was in the cub scouts (not of my own free will - my parents forced me into this crap).

Besides, as you probably guessed, I was only talking nonsense.
Major point of contention this week:
Human beings aren't used cars—we aren't obligated to disclose every ditch we drove ourselves into before we resell ourselves
I think that dating after teenage years is pretty much the same as buying and selling used cars. You actually don't disclose every ditch you drove through when you sell your car. You try to be generally honest about its condition, if you're a generally honest person. And you're an idiot to purchase a car without a thorough inspection or even a test drive, with only the seller's word to go by. Only an idiot expects a used car to function as a new one, too.

PGMN - I find it less useful to assign "fault", and more useful to identify who is unhappy and why, and what can be done to fix it.. to get back to happy. As much as emotions seem inefficient and objectively unimportant, they are the reason humans do anything.

He is unhappy that you are interfering with his interests. You are unhappy at the lack of attention, and worried that he is following the cliche of trading you in for a younger model.

Follow Dan's advice and let him do his thing without protest for awhile without you, and he should have no reason to complain. But that won't solve your unhappiness. You could find a younger model yourself, for company with your own interests. It seems that he's not willing to show you that you have higher priority than his friend, by carving out more time for you or even offering reassuring words... so he may well be looking to trade in. You can't control how others feel, he's allowed to fall out of love with you. But if you're truly a great person, someone else will probably fall in love with you instead. If you're a great person, you'll probably upgrade by trading in anyway. But I'm sorry for your pain. I'm sure you'll fix it eventually.

NCA - Disclosing your weaknesses and vulnerabilities requires some reasonable amount of trust. I'd look for the type of trust that comes from a history of a partner handling disappointing disclosures well. I wouldn't tell someone who freaks out at any imperfection, even though new infatuation can make it seem like a good idea to open up about everything. Baby steps. The other option.. hooking up with someone who has the same problem, to try to work through it together... like people hooking up in AA.. Since it was premarital, and did not factor into the reasons for your current separation, I think it would distract from more pressing problems that you should address. Like.. why are you separated (or divorcing)?

USA!USA! - Has this couple really twisted your brain enough for you to forget what every 3 year old knows? "She kept touching me even though I said no and THAT IS WRONG!" It really has nothing to do with sex or a particular sex act. Facials have always seemed worse than red wings to me because it's like a squirt gun, and you've gotta wonder about a guy who wants to do that more than have you suck it out. Just what are they getting off on? Shooting you in the face I guess. Or wishing for porn to be real or something. Stop caring if assholes like you.. it's actually better for your happiness if assholes DON'T like you, I think.

FLAGS - It's not against the law to fantasize, but his fantasies seem kinda gross. Er.. are you laughing at these "jokes"? (wtf knock it off) Or acting uncomfortable about them, yet they continue? It might not be about underage kids, but about crossing boundaries with you. It's not something that requires cops so much as the self control to quit seeing him.

The common variable in all your relationships is you. Guys are not all jerks. But the guys you date seem to be. I'd say try to keep from dating until you are attracted to someone who proves to be a decent guy... before the hookup.
You don't have to break in the engine with a used car. A scratch doesn't depreciate the value by hundreds or thousands with a used car. And, by the time you are a used car yourself, you should be able to handle general maintenance without bugging the dealer all the time.

I wish I could change my own air filter. I guess humans are a BIT different from used cars.
@34: To a certain degree, I think the laundry list of ridiculous requirements for unicorns is just a sub-species of the inexperienced, entitled person's laundry list of ridiculous requirements for a significant other, compounded by the fact that there are now two inexperienced, entitled people putting points on the list.

And to some degree, the couple of two inexperienced, entitled people form such ridiculous lists for thirds because they find each other lacking--not necessarily by realistic standards, but by pie-in-the-sky, happily-ever-after standards--and poly is really seen as caulk to fill those cracks, instead of being understood as an actual relationship.
XiaoGui17 @55,

Mostly agreed.

Much of it is the fear that polyamory could be a threat to the couple, and why would happy-couple-in-the-present want to do anything that would compromise happy-couple-in-the-future? So the security of the couple is placed above the needs of a third.

And they love one another and would never want to make eachother jealous but do not love their unicorn because they haven't met her yet, so they prioritize the feelings of the beloved over the feelings of the hypothetical.

Part of becoming poly is being able to accept that yes, it's totally a threat to the couple, at least as you know it. Things will change in unpredictable ways and you will be ok anyway. All of you will feel jealous at times, so you need the emotional maturity and communication skills to make things work anyway. Maybe your spouse will become simply a nesting partner for the raising of children, your new partner will become your "primary" and get your romantic focus while your spouse starts frequenting orgies and swing events. Maybe the triad will end up as a vee but the pivot will get cancer and spend a few years needing supportive care and feeling unsexy and nobody will be getting any unless things change again.

If you don't have confidence that you can adapt to change, you shouldn't attempt poly. Things will change and you will waste energy fighting change instead of changing with them.

*** *** ***
I heard someone once refer to his adopt-a-divorcee program. Friends who were divorcing would rebound as their unicorn for a few months to recover confidence before leaving to move on. Sounds great for everyone.
Alison @ 56

We touched on the age factor earlier, and if I may I’d like to go back and get a second or more opinion/s. This time for the single person who isn’t into couples, a male-born with an admittedly hefty added value tax that looks mostly for single women or trans men. (Had the het couples opportunities yet declined, things may shift, who knows.)

A high poly priestess had recently suggested I should identify as poly myself, and it does make a lot of sense. (Sadly enough exclusively in the context of the relationships I’m looking for. Very sadly and never enough is that no one is lining up by my office box as I type this.)

Women my age, lets define them as early 50’s and up, are not likely to be very receptive to the poly idea. Assuming they are still with me after the added value tax, which I disclose prior to the initial hokey pokey. Add to this that most of those women who are into kinky stuff have already figured out they can get younger, better looking, less hairy and much more hetero-flexible ordinary folks. Another big cloud in the horizon is professor nocute’s Dickonomics 101.

I’d say the cut off starts by/bi 45 yo or so. (Oh hi there your highness high priestess. Rest assured, you’re still ahead of your time.)
As for trans men, there weren’t any 10 years ago and the older dudes were all programmed to be attracted to vagina-equipped folks. As for the younger ones, you already know.

So, as much as I love being the compulsive outsider I’d also like to get laid every now and then. Not to mention having my needs somewhat half way met.
Please let me know what I can do to advance my agenda.

Intimacy. The labels are detracting from the reality of that. Finding and enjoying intimacy. Yes, a kink needs to be disclosed as a part of oneself, it's not the whole.
And I dissagree CMD. I'd suggest some older women would be open to poly, because they more than likely have tried the other.
@57: Running with poly circles is only handy insofar as poly circles tend to overlap strongly with kinky circles, and kinky circles tend to be both more sexual (for both good and ill), and as groups full of self-identified oddballs tend to have less of a knee-jerk reaction to transness. You'll probably still be seen as an other, but an other who gets waved around to show off other peoples lefty cred as opposed to a freak.

Trans issues and unicorns have very little overlap. The archetypal unicorn is closer to the MPDG than anything else; an attractive add-on that enhances the person's(/couple's) life without bringing any pesky complications or conflicting personality traits of their own. Unicorn/MPDG seekers often aim cis and young, but that's more a general statement about what women get the most attention.
Jesus Christ who gives a magical flying horse fuck about the semantics of unicorn? Somewhere a 9 yesr old girl with rainbow stickers all over her bedroom is going nuh uh YOU'RE using unicorn wrong. Language is squishy. Your stalky commitment dragging up Savage's years old past uses though is solidly creepy.
CMDwannabe @57,

Being a woman in my early fifties myself, and having been nonmonogamous since I was thirteen, you sound... depressed. When a person is depressed they tend to have a Problems With No Solutions and Everything Is Impossible and Nothing Is Worth Even Trying. Maybe talk to your therapist about it? I’m not trying to be patronizing, just offering feedback about how things look from over here.

Anyway. Your question. Not sure I fully disentangled it, but let’s see what I can suggest.

Are you on Fetlife? Go to munches. The ones I go to always have CDs and TVs which tells me that if nothing else they feel accepted. Potlucks and munches may be grouped by age, which is nice socially. Other events are not, which is nice for the eye candy. People who go to events are more likely to be single or otherwise open to partnering or making new friends than people who stay home with an SO, so it’s a good place to start investigating new social circles from en femme. Put on some stockings with a garter belt, a short dress to flaunt those legs and charm the socks off the lovely folk you’ll meet.

Women in their fifties are not necessarily in search of The One. Many straight women are post-nesters luxuriating in the freedom of being divorced and not having to pick up some guy’s socks and listen to him complain. Boyfriends — fine and fun. But they need to have their own place to go home to.

On the other hand, I would say even more divorced men in their fifties are post-nesters seeking to make up for the wild times they missed out on while they were breadwinning. That means that the straight women who are looking for The One aren’t working with great odds. You might have more choice than you were expecting. Especially if you are paying attention to the women older than you as well as younger.

Remember that women our age had David Bowie posters on our walls as teens. Because they thought he was hot. And still do. You aren’t doomed. It’s just that it’s a lot harder to meet new people once you’re out of college — for everyone.
@49 LavaGirl: Thank you very much for more kind support. I don't go to the vet's center where I live, anymore. It's somewhat hard to explain, but the people there--counselors---are a bit selective in the veterans they choose to help. To them, since I wasn't on a ship, in a foxhole, or deployed overseas, I should just "get over it". I have only been brushed off. Their idea of veterans support services for someone like me?
"Go to the Yellow Pages and pick anyone you like."
So I am going through the supportive veteran channels instead. The veterans and others who are believe my claims for PTSD disability compensation and benefits are warranted.
@57 CMDwannabe and @61 Alison Cummins: I agree with both of you and empathize on being female over 5-0 (turned 5-2 last Saturday). I share a lot of your thoughts.
I am among the ever-growing national statistic of otherwise physically healthy and happily living single, not looking (outside the issues I'm having with PTSD). I can't imagine intimacy, anymore, or being coupled. My pursuits of it have repeatedly resulted in painful consequences for me. And many men 45-50+ seem to prefer women in their 30's and 40's who might want to have children with them. I never planned on having kids.
ChiTodd @ 59
“an other who gets waved around to show off other peoples lefty cred as opposed to a freak.”
Yes, that’s a shift I’m certainly experiencing. It is also part of my frustration, as showing off lefties over a certain age are not likely to extend their acceptance beyond a certain point.

Alison @ 61
Ouch. Not sure about depressed, though certainly a whiner, which was somewhat enhanced in order to make a point.
The point is finding an elusive age cutoff line where some behaviors and preferences that were marginal in the past and observed only in small circles are now making inroads to the main stream.
Different types of relationships, some forms of bondage, gender fluidity, roles etc. can be part of the menu nowadays, or at least will not be immediate deal breakers like they used to.
Again, this is in relation to mainstream.

Thanks for all your advice. I have tried some of the activities you mentioned in the past and now that I’m older and wiser should pursue them again, broaden my searches, and make myself more marketable. By some accounts I do have nice legs while in stockings.
I don't see depression coming thru CMD's words, Alison.
I see a disconnect between kink and the rest. I see that here CMD, so don't go getting mad at me.
Now that I'm an old hand on Fetlife, being on for a couple of months now, from what I take in from what I'm reading, is that those who take their kink thruout their persona, seem to have found an interesting life arrangement.
Seeing a kink as something to get over disclosing, is very different from feeling pretty damn hot to have this special part of oneself.
When you first joined here CMD, and we connected, I had some very erotic fantasies involving a cross dressing man.
I thought every girl was crazy 'bout a cross-dressed man? Did I mishear those lyrics? ;)
Chi @59: Manic pixie dream girl was exactly the comparison I drew from Alison's description of the original unicorn archetype. Manic poly dream girl?
I bet there are both-bi OS couples who fantasize about the genderqueer third of their dreams.
USA! USA! Remember: The issue is not the facial. Your former partners want to make that the central focus, as well as some of the commenters. The act itself makes no difference. It could be toe-sucking or cream pie or shaving your head. The issue, the sole issue, the only thing you should bother mentioning is that you communicated clearly you didn't want X, and he did X anyway. The guy isn't a straight shooter, in the sack or at the kitchen table.

Stop fixating on age. Crossdressing is a turn-on for many women in all age groups. Whining is a universal turn-off.

LavaGirl is wise. If you want to meet women attracted to your crossdressing self, crossdress and put yourself out there where they can find you! You can’t recognise women into CDs/GQs. They don’t have a special mole next to their nose or a cute tail or a particular age. But they can recognize you.

Think of lesbian butch/femme dynamics. The butch was identifiable as a lesbian, the femme was not. So (at least in the wild) the femme initiated the flirting.
@66 I Always thought that lyric was ""Every girls crazy 'bout a SHY BEST MAN" ;-)
Thanks to all who chimed in. While my escapist age-acceptance-cut-off-line theory was never confirmed, what I do hear is “Stop whining, just go out there, be your confident self and things may happen.” All along in the back of my head Ringo, slightly out of tune as always, reminds me that “It don’t come easy.”

There’s an ongoing event tonight I haven’t attended in few years. I have to get up early tomorrow morning and friends- in their 30’s, not that age matters- couldn’t make it.
It may still be a suitable evening for brownish silk shorts and black stockings regardless. Stay tuned.
CMDwannabe @72,

@sb53, @LavaGirl, and, I understand, @CMDwannabe: Please feel free to email me and continue to do so when you can. Hearing from you is a boost along with music, my beloved VW , cats, wonderfully supportive people blessing my life, and all that is good.

I'm sorry that I haven't had a lot to add to this week's SL thread. I will try again in this next edition. I have a feeling that if Hunter's commentary response is weak, it's probably due to a lot of summer vacationers away from their computers (at least, those of us above the Equator).
I miss SeanDR and LateBloomer. I'm hoping LateBloomer isn't here commenting because he's fixed his relationship problems and is having lots of sex instead.

Fewer comments are also a result of fewer trolls around. Good riddance to MrE. And Phil seems to be behaving herself too, though I wouldn't know directly. But also, I think the columns lately have been less controversial. I'll wait to see what Dan tackles in next week's edition.
LW1, you are married to a selfish asshole. I'm sorry. Maybe it's the time invested that makes you reluctant to walk away, but while you waste more time on this immature POS, you're missing out on a potential relationship with a REAL man... or the peace of being single, which is so much better than being with a cruel thoughtless prick. DTMFA. You're alone anyway in this relationship. You'll be amazed at how good it feels to kick him to the curb and stand up for yourself. You're lucky... at least you don't have kids to suffer collateral damage (and you won't have malingering custody issues).
I only saw this mentioned in passing regarding PGMN, but it seems the main problem to me. It isn't that she doesn't share his hobby, they have conflicting schedules, or that she feels threatened by the younger woman. All of those things may be true, but the real problem is that when she tries to bring it up to her husband, he completely blows her off and refuses to acknowledge that there even is a problem. I see her dismissal of his hobby as a response to his emotional dismissal of her. I completely disagree with Dan's advice, because when Pokémon is no longer trendy, he will have another interest and still disregard her feelings. You can't communicate with someone who refuses to listen.
Unintentional pun of the week: "malingering custody issues."
Oh ha! You know who is really a unicorn? Men down for MFM threesomes. I have met only one in my life but he did something to royally piss me off before we could get around to finding a third.

Nope, not unicorns. Not even snow leopards, I suspect.

I think what you might be facing is responses from guys who are thinking of pussy, and you as an obstacle to Getting All The Pussy.

Are you open to MMF, not just MFM? Because if you specify MMF you are much less likely to get guys saying "Yes! Totally down for a threesome! Only, I've never done this before and I'm afraid I won't be able to perform with a guy in the room watching. I think it would work better if you were somewhere else. Like, a different city or something."
Alison Cummins, I think you are under the assumption that I'm a guy. I'm not. I'm a woman! And I don't know what you mean by MMF vs. MFM. I just meant I would only do a 3-some with two men and not with another woman. I'm not interested in women at all. I haven't actively looked for this, as in placing an ad or anything. It's just that any guy I've been with that I've discussed 3-somes with has only been interested in a 2-girl 3-some if anything except for that one guy, like I said, but I was only with him for 2 months so it never happened. But what surprised me was that he was the one who brought it up, which I found very unusual (although he stubbornly insisted HE pick the other guy, which we argued about and I finally said okay but only if he meets this long list of criteria - not sure why that was so important but like I said, it never happened anyway.)

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.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.