Savage Love Dec 27, 2017 at 4:00 am



“He is sexually experienced, but he's not open-minded. One thing he won't do is kiss me after I've swallowed his load. We've been together only four months”

This seems pretty minor, so I wonder what other patterns she’s using to consider him “not open-minded”.
Also persons need to stop overloading the definition of “unicorn”, dagnabbit.
@2, yeah i was wondering "wtf do they mean by that".
Douching your butt prior should be a requirement for anal (no mess, no smell), and a quick rinse after will ensure no leaking Santorum or the equally gross decomposing come/dead butt babies.
Plus, she was "going for a run" — presumably outdoors, and presumably after which she would be hitting the shower first thing. I'm not seeing a significant problem here.
Aaaarrghhhhhh! CUMU, you do not have a "unicorn boyfriend." Unless your boyfriend is actually female, and you have another boyfriend. "Unicorn" has an established definition; please do not confuse the Skeptics-and-Cynics of the world by giving it other meanings! Dan, you missed a chance to stop this hijacking of the term.

I took "sexually experienced but not open-minded" to mean that he'd tried a lot of things, but didn't like them much, and preferred to stick with vanilla sex.
I'm wondering what CUMU means exactly by "after I've swallowed his load." Immediately after, or for the rest of the night? While he can still taste his own cum (come is a verb, cum a noun), or even after she's taken a drink of water? If giving head meant no kissyface for the rest of the night, CUMU's concern would be a bit more, well, concerning.
Hey, STOP: While we're busy preferring things, I'd prefer it if you'd fuck off. I want to be reading Dan's relationship advice long after we're both old and decrepit.

Hey Savage: You posted that just to wind me up. Admit it!
CUMU- maybe introduce the kissing gradually. Rinse your mouth right after and cuddle, kiss him gently on the cheek and see if he’s for a full blown mouth to mouth.
Take it from there after you check his reaction, maybe you can forgo the rinse next time, and if he’s ok and you want to try it this can also lead to snowballing at some point.
BTW, do you go down on him after he’s been inside you? If that’s the case then you may have a leverage of some sort, or at least a pointer in a conversation.

Fred @ 5- It feels like there’s a small amount of diarrhea-like substance in your panties, and could also leak on your thighs while running.
@6: I accept the “willing to step in and out of an established couples’ life without changing established dynamics” and more cynical William Moulton Marstonesque definition of “willing to become a second-class kept babysitter and sexual third for an established partnership”. But no more!
@9: “BTW, do you go down on him after he’s been inside you? If that’s the case then you may have a leverage of some sort, or at least a pointer in a conversation.“

Has that ever worked in the history of its attempt?
Stating This Obvious Point wrote, "I would have preferred that a woman who was an actual lesbian was rendering advice to other lesbians. As a man, you are not qualified to deal out sex advice to women—especially to lesbians."

Guess what, STOP: butt out. You don't get to tell other lesbians what to do. If the original questioner wanted a lesbian's advice, she could have written to Dear Prudence or any other lesbian advice columnist. She wrote to Dan because she wanted Dan's advice. Dan didn't go butting into Prudence's comments section to offer unsolicited advice. His advice was solicited and he responded. Where do you get off, STOP, in telling other women that they can't seek advice from whomever they wish?
An uplifting holidays-spirit story for you:
Over 20 years ago some young co-workers told me The Strange is better than The Weekly despite being free, and I should also read that Savage dude.
I was a confused married guy who thought a gay man has no business advising straights nor anyone else. But being free there were always bunch of copies laying around and I started reading it here and there. It evolved to giggling at times and not being able to eat my lunch as I lost my appetite due to the subject matter on some other occasions.
I even wrote a real letter, back in the “Hey Faggot” days, but it wasn’t published. I wrote another letter, seemingly from the other end of my original question, hoping both will be published, his first book.

Some 10 years ago, after I moved out, figured things out and started going en femme on occasion, the older child started college. One of my parental advice back then was telling them they should read SL on a weekly basis. They made a disgusted face, though probably because sex was mentioned by a parent.
Two years later I came out to that already 21 yo person. They nodded, smiled, and told me, “Oh, I’ve heard about people like you, I’ve been listening to the Dan Savage podcast every week for the past year or so.”
We have great relationship nowadays and I believe Mr. Savage has something to do with it and should be thanked.
Happy holidays to you too!
undead @ 11
Yes, but I can only speak for myself.
The unfinished paragraph @ 13:
"I even wrote a real letter, back in the “Hey Faggot” days, but it wasn’t published. I wrote another letter, seemingly from the other end of my original question, hoping both will be published, but only the second one made it to print and later was also included in his first book."
I'm the only person that has ever barebacked my partner and I'll never forget the first time we did it and his complete surprise a little while after when it started leaking out of him.

"Honey, what did you think happened with the load I just put in you?"
Tagging on to what others have said to STOP that people who write to Dan are fully aware that he's
(a) a man
(b) gay.

If they don't think a gay man can give them meaningful advice, they wouldn't write to him. He's not the only advice columnist out there.
In fact, I think Dan is one of the forces behind the growing tolerance or nonchalant acceptance of gay people on the part of the straight community: people see him give advice to straight people and it's good; they read the issues that his gay, lesbian, and bi readers write in with and see that their problems are often no different from their own, and that Dan's advice would be equally applicable to a straight person with the same problem. I think Dan's column has been a universalizing force.

And, STOP, the question wasn't about an issue that pertains only to lesbians that a man couldn't understand; it was about a couple with mismatched libidos. That is a problem in lots of couples, no matter the orientations of the members.

However, I do think that both the column and the podcast would sometimes benefit from having the perspective of female voices from time to time, and not just when the question is vulva-related. Dan regularly brings in guest experts if the questions require more specialized knowledge or experience than he has, but those questions are usually about something medical or pretty kinky or trans-related or disability-related, and sometimes I think that, when the problem is a relationship issue that's not super-specialized or just regarding the logistics of a female body, it would be good to get the occasional woman's perspective. For instance, more than once, women have written or called with the problem of their partner's "accidentally" penetrating them anally when in the midst of PIV sex. Dan more than once said that there's no way that anal just "accidentally" happens, because he can't envision it, but many female readers or listeners chimed in to say that indeed, it's possible or even easy for accidental anal to occur. Given that his misunderstanding about the feasibility of accidental anal led to him characterizing the woman's partner as an asshole and the prescription of DTMFA, it would have been a good idea for him to have at least consulted some women before advising the lws or callers that their partners were motherfuckers who should be dumped.

Fortunately, there's the comments section, where different voices regularly offer better advice or a better understanding of the situation.
(Though I do wish Dan would let me, a straight single woman about his age, be a guest co-writer/podcast talker, to complement his perspective as a gay married man. But that's just my dream.)
Yeah, I was wondering what made the first lw's boyfriend a unicorn. Unless that term now just means, "wonderful."
But-but-but, Dan, do ALL guys have refractory periods? I'm gay and when I really like a guy, I'm basically never repulsed.
Dan lately you've seemed bloody obsessed with men's refractory periods and women's supposed lack of them. Guess fucking what. When I come I immediately lose interest in sex, I get sleepy and hungry, it feels unpleasant to be touched sexually, and has been this way since my very first orgasm. AND IM A WOMAN. Because I'm socialised to be very deferent to men and sexually selfless (and also just generally being a conscientious lover who is concerned with my partner's pleasure) I usually keep going with them until they come too if I am the first one. So so so many women are like this yet Dan seems totally oblivious. It's not like I'm the exception, people's orgasms are just on a sliding scale, as with gender, as with most things. My ex boyfriend could be up and ready again within a minute or two of orgasming and ejaculating, yet for me it takes an absolute minimum of about 45 minutes. Another point is that a lot of vaginal intercourse gives nearly no stimulation that would lead to orgasm for a women and so what is actually happening is that a woman comes and then they keep fucking in a position such as the aforementioned and her refractory period actually happens during this. Then they change positions or stimulate her clit and she can come again. It's not necessarily this multiple orgasming without refractory period thing, it's just that she didn't feel entitled like many dudes are told they should be to just call quits on all sexual activity once she orgasmed, and they basically rode out that waiting time. This idea that women's orgasms are all one way and men's are all another just is patently false and it gives the disservice of giving men a legitimacy that women deserve too of being selfish after they've come (in the name of hormones as Dan loves to innaccurately point out) while taking away the legitimacy of sex ending once a woman has come (even if her partner has not).
@18: maybe he's got a horn on his head?
@19 Same, also some men have very, very short refractory periods, I can't touch or suck my partner's dick after he comes because it is too sensitive, I've been known to come and keep fucking and come again within a very short period of time.

And really if my partner sucks me off and keeps going I will almost always come again, the only reason it doesn't happen more often when I am fucking is I'm normally just tired after some intense fucking.
'Facebook stalking for spank bank purposes is fine—we all do it..'
@17: I'd read a nocutename advice column.
Nocute- you’re already in. It just occurred to me that you have inadvertently answered my original age-old question to Dan during a fairly recent discussion here.
Santorum, the frothy mixture of cum and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex has struck again. Agreed somewhat with @4: ANAL could do a good butt-scrub prior to anal sex, then do a rinse afterward, and later shower after the run.
@17 nocutename: I'd LOVE to read your column! I think you'd be great at it.
Dan? What do you think? nocutename as a guest columnist?
@SPANK: I second @23 JodoKast's 'Nope'. I don't do that either, further proving that not everybody does it.
Thank you, Dan, for a superb response for STOP, and for NOT being a heartless RepubliKKKan idiot.
@STOP: Stop it already. Your shallow criticism of Dan and rant on qualifications goes nowhere. We don't need no stinkin' badges!
@21 venomlash: Touche! Ba-doom boom....
OMG! Santorum, DTMFA (x2), AND "We don't need no stinkin' badges!"
My year is complete!!
@24, 25, 26: Thanks, guys!
CMD, now I am very curious: what was your "original, age-old question" and how did I answer it?
I agree with undead ayn rand @10: "Unicorn" is someone willing to play 3rd to a married couple, so unless she also has a husband and both of them are screwing the boyfriend, he's not a unicorn.

For STOP, if she wants lesbians to only get advice from other lesbians, she needs to go take that up with whatever lesbians are currently asking non-lesbians for advice.

Or maybe he's been ridiculed by other women because of his lame-ass foot fetish. Which, I'm sure Dan, you know is *totally* a thing.
CMD @9: He doesn't want a "full blown mouth," that's the point. *ba-dum tish*
I agree with Undead @11: "You should do X because I like doing X" is not logical. I think that she just needs to accept this is one of his limits.

CMD @13: Thank you for your story, just a few of millions of examples of non-gay men who've been helped by Mr Savage over the decades. Dan, as another non-gay non-man, thank you!

Nocute @17: It's my dream too. :)

Nocute @18: She seems to be using it to mean "rare and wonderful." (Ahem, isn't everybody's partner "rare and wonderful" to them? Except, of course, for the rounded-up .64s...)

Hidey @20: I never saw Dan claim that women don't have refractory periods. Obviously, given some women have written in perplexed by their male partners' post-orgasm lethargy, this is not universal. But you're correct that many women do also need some sort of a break post-orgasm, so thank you for pointing this out.

TS @31: He still wouldn't be a "unicorn" unless he was female. As discussed, even straight guys who want to bone a couple aren't terribly rare.

Gromm @32: It still wouldn't justify his punishing INGAA for not guessing that his lame-ass fetish is to do with feet.
BiDan and nocutename should guest on a show. I think they live in different parts of the world, but that's no barrier in an age of technology.

I agree with the second DTMFA (bf says sex life is too vanilla but won't suggest e.g. anal) but not the second (bf says it's disturbing that she likes it when he spanks her). Surely in the case of the unassimilated dominant urges, she should just say to him what Dan said to her? That it seems that he likes dominating his partner, but he's not incorporated the urges into a consensual sex life and rather seems ashamed of them? Maybe he'd express surprise she liked being dommed--and would feel the happiest and most unguarded of pleasures when the blindfold and handcuffs came out....?


Most likely answer for you is that he is NOT into fun consensual D/s play, he's trying to play power games on you. The walking around and slapping your ass is, "look what I can do to you! Haha!" because for most people, being slapped on the ass at random isn't something we enjoy.

If he does it in front of other people, he's marking his territory, not trying to push your foreplay button.

And then there's like this, which means it's totally harshing his mellow vibe of Being In Charge Over The SO, so he tries to shame you. This Thing That You Like Is NOT OK! Never Mind That I Do It, It's Not OK to Like It!

Get away and find yourself a partner who will slap you on the ass only when you want to be slapped on the ass and who will gleefully slap you on the ass for your mutual fun and enjoyment.

@20 yeah that used to happen to me and it doesn't anymore cause multiples. I think most would can have multiple orgasms, so probably not women don't have the disgust refractory thing going on. Have you asked around? Because I haven't run into any other women that experienced the refractory completely fucking it off the game thing that I have and you do, even for women who don't multiple (and for those who don't, it's not necc any better to have many, the solo ones that you really gotta work to get are often far more intense than a dozen in a row).
Ugh, phone. Women not would, out not off.
@22 not sure the sensitivity thing is either gender specific or a refractory period issue, although, relevant, for me, female, w a partner sensitivity never an issue, solo yes. So who the hell knows what's up with that. With men I've run into who have this the sensitivity stuff hasn't seemed to be related to refractory period specifically but it does absolutely prevent contact for a while, to the degree that pulling out after orgasm seems to almost hurt them.
@36 still incoherent, sorry. "Completely fucking out of the game" , "probably most women don't have the disgust refractory period thing going on".
@20 I absolutely agree w your point re when sex is determined to end by most straight dudes. Default should be whenever anyone taps out wrestling style and not a goddamned second before. And like you I've had refractory periods like a guy and like you, guess what, no one could tell because dammit, like you, I'm a grown adult and I care about my partners. It's crap manners to stop just because you came regardless of gender, but re straight guy manners specifically I'm assuming we descended from patriarchy straight into porn clips and skipped the ask lesbians how women really like to fuck step, so it's a common but extremely regrettable error. Compound that with no one wanting to hurt the feelings of straight men so their cocks keep working and you get a mess.
Happy to see the topic of refractory periods as further evidence that men aren't from Mars, women aren't from Venus, we are in fact more alike than we are different, and broad variations exist that are only partly genitalia-related. For me, the refractory period is marked not by disgust but by hypersensitivity that requires me to take a post-orgasm breather. Fortunately, like Hidey @20's partner, it only takes me a few minutes to "return to earth" and get back into the swing of things.
LW1 would you hassle a female friend for not swallowing?
Re Spanky McGee - be sure to slap his ass on your way out from dumping him. No mercy.
@41 possibly relevant is that as far as multiple orgasms for me is that they are in quick succession - there may be clitoral sensitivity but vaginally you could probably hit me with a baseball bat at that point and I'd be fine. I wouldn't know re clit sensitivity cause I don't do direct clitoral stim unless solo, so maybe that's it. I'm trying to imagine vaginal sensitivity to the point of gtfo and I can't.
@41 and yes sensitivity at any point and stop is fine, didn't want to make that seem like it wasnt ok. Reduced intensity of stim helps prevent that pre-orgasm, post seems to occur regardless (although, re increased pain/discomfort tolerance due to arousal, does anyone think maybe the post orgasm sensitivity is due to loss of arousal and so loss of pain tolerance?).
@20 do you also lose the physical arousal or just the psychological? Bc for me it was just the psych, then as now physical arousal can last for hours after, don't think this is true for guys. So there's a difference there.
Hidey @20, I do believe you've been fucking the wrong guys, if they don't either give you a break automatically, or respond to "wait, I need a rest!" Most men take that as a compliment, IME. (And yes, women who have sex with women expect this to happen; generally we take it in turns to get each other off, with cuddling and conversation in between Big O's.)
@35: I wonder if Dan even got that one right.

"He goes in for domineering head games and "playful" violence because he's abusive and controlling. (2) He's got kinks, but he hasn't managed to incorporate his kinks into his sex life in a healthy, consensual manner—and now that he knows you enjoy the same things he does (but you're healthier about them than he is), he's projecting his self-loathing onto you."

The first yes. The "self-loathing" about kink, I'm not so sure of. Maybe he hasn't managed to incorporate them consensually because he's not and will not be interested in consensual power games? Expressing ownership over random people in your purview isn't always play, the same way street harassment isn't "kink".
@43: "be sure to slap his ass on your way out from dumping him. No mercy."

He'd be the type to hit back.
Nocute- “Age old” was back in the binary gender days, ongoing secretive “compulsive” dressing up in an almost exclusively sexual manner, ongoing fear and frustration while attempting to kick the habit.

The forms of transwomanhood known to the media back then comprised mostly of drag queens, trans prostitutes, and serial killers.
There were also some oscure studies, or at least speculations, suggesting that somewhere between 5%-15% of straight men, which is how I identified at the time, find dressing up in women’s clothes to be “sexually arousing.”
My question, the original one, dealt with the possibility of nature symmetry, is there also a genuine interest for such thing among members of the opposite camp beyond the $300/hr pro doms, and how to present this to my then wife.

A similar situation came up in a letter few months ago. In the discussion that followed you wrote that if a man you dated was into dressing up during sexy time you would be willing to tolerate that aspect of him every now and then, though not all the time.
While this was short of the “Wow, totally hot!” answer that some would expect, I thought it was very balanced, respectful, and GGG.
Granted, attitudes, assumptions, and knowledge have evolved over the last 20 years, yet I view the response as realistic and accommodating, one that could have been very encouraging back then and still is today.

I will relay my recommendations to add yourself and BDF to the board of answeries if and when I run into the authorities.

CMD@9: So that was you yesterday morning?

Sorry if you were grossed out, but you might have asked for my consent before putting your hand down there.
@CDM: I think about the journey you've been on and where you are now, and it seems to me to be such a better place. I know it has taken lots of work on your part, but I want to congratulate you on living your more authentic life. Mazel Tov!

You know, it's funny: I can get into what some might call a sexual rut, but I'd call a groove: when I like something, or it's working, I can quite happily do it over and over. I once ate the exact same lunch every day for two years because I found it so satisfying. So as long as the sex is good and leads to orgasms, I can just keep having it the same way and I wouldn't necessarily say I was bored. But I also like to mix things up and if I've fallen into the groove of having sex the exact same way with a partner and then we do something different or I have sex with someone else, it's like I have forgotten just how much I like sex to be different. I'll think, Oh, yeah; that's right! I do like variety!

In the spirit of changing things up, I am up for most anything (barring poop) on occasion. It breaks my heart to think that someone would be so opposed to having sex with her male partner when he's dressed in women's clothing once in a while, that it would shame him to silence and end a marriage. Back in the old days, did you think of yourself as being "en femme" (which I take to mean you feel yourself to embody a more female or feminine persona) when you were dressing in lingerie and wanted to have sexy times, or did you feel yourself to be an exclusively straight man who just happened to find wearing women's clothes erotic?
I hope you don't mind me asking and I apologize if I misunderstand or mischaracterize your former and current feelings, or if I get your definition of being "en femme" wrong.
+1 to Ms Cute and Ms Fan for admitting to being self-serving. (If you really want to bring this about, I suggest you get Mr Miller to start collecting Faberge eggs.) As I doubt either of you is a Terminal Giggler, that would automatically constitute an improvement over Podcast Lucy, even if there were a duplication of the excessive NRE which left many listeners feeling assaulted. (I have a hypothetical along that line saved up for an opportune moment.)

While I can agree with Ms Cute's point that the occasional added perspective would improve a number of answers where Mr Savage has a blind spot, the idea as a whole makes me think of When We Dead Awaken. If not extremely sparing and careful, Mr Savage would end up being like the figure of Irena in Rubek's great work Resurrection, gradually pushed to the side and diminished as one new idea and then another took central prominence. Providing a female perspective to shore up a few spots feels like the cosmetic treatment that would shift the balance of the whole work and eventually cause assimilation.

Now I shall wonder all day about whether the case against increasing Mr Savage's estrogen content does or doesn't resemble the case against having International Men's Day.
Actually, Dan, you CONSTANTLY give Republicans advice on "Blabbermouth." Not your fault if they don't listen...
@53: Mr. Ven, for me, it wasn't Lucy's giggling that was so offensive; it was her sycophancy. And the fact that, at her age and experience, I don't think she could really contribute much beyond starry-eyed agreement.

Oh, yes, I am totally self-serving. Although I will say that on the rare occasions that Dan has Nancy and he discuss the caller's question, I find I really appreciate the perspective of a woman who isn't called in as an expert on health (like the female Planned Parenthood doctors) or women's sexual issues (like Debby Herbenick or that woman who live-tweeted her son's sex ed, whose name I can't remembered) or people who represent the kink-and/or-sex-worker world (like Mistress Matisse). I mean, I appreciate them, too, but especially insofar as the questions are often more about sexual relationships than mechanics these days, I think it would be useful to get a female perspective to round out Dan's blind spots. (With the caveat that there is no universal "female experience" or "female perspective" of course). Dan often says things explaining why women do what they do or he makes assumptions about what they mean or want that, as a woman, seem just so wrong to me.
Re: refractory periods, I had a boyfriend who had almost none. He was in his 50s and could come 6 or 7 times in a two-hour period, the first 4 or 5 of those without ever going soft. Even when he got soft after an orgasm, he was ready to go again in about 5 minutes, tops. But I've had many partners, and none has had the turn-around time he had.

I am usually good for a bunch of orgasms or a couple of multiples and then might need a breather--but literally only a couple of minutes or two.

But I am distressed to hear the perspective that women are sharing that sex is over when the man decides it's over for him. I used to know men like that, but lately my partners are much more ggg and I guess I just thought that that was the way the whole world was nowadays.
Nocute- no problem with asking questions, any questions.
Besides, Lava used to tell us that young people from all over the world read SL, so I hope my views help them, their loved ones and their neighbours.

My past secretive dressing up activities seemed mostly sexual, followed by shame once it was over. Looking back I can now see that there was always longing for more, for being able to express my femme self in other ways as well.
My secret took a toll on other aspects of my life like not being present, misuse of time and resources, and obviously not being truthful to myself and others.
Yes, I viewed myself as straight, mostly because of fear and an inner need to prove my masculinity throughout my life. I’m a bit more flexible nowadays.

I use the term “en femme” for appearance, presenting myself as a woman. Most of the time I’m out and about in my semi bald dude costume, and mostly en femme while at the confines of my place (while gladly avoiding makeup and a wig.)
I recently started testing an “in between” look while going out, which probably makes me “gay” for older folks and “queer” for the younger crowd. Not that I care anymore.

Your definition of “en femme” seems to be more on the inner side of things, and once again looking back I can now see that it was there all along. Frightening at times in the past, yet acknowledged and often celebrated nowadays.
I don’t have an urge to go with hormones and beyond, at least not now.
Refractory periods. Once again, I learn something new each weekly installment of Savage Love.
Thank you, Dan!
Raging hormones. Aren't they fun? *sigh*
No @44: Yes, like Hidey @20 says, I sometimes can "ride out" PIV and tune out the sensation, if the orgasm wasn't a particularly strong one, until I return to earth and rejoin my body. Post-orgasm sensitivity can extend to pretty much any of the skin on my body, given the right kind of touch!

Nocute @56: The usual solution to the male-refractory problem, for a considerate male at least, is to make sure his female partner has had a satisfying number of orgasms (whatever that number may be for her) before he allows himself to ejaculate. Everyone comes, everyone's happy.
In contrast to your lover, I had a partner whom I met in his late 30s and dated until mid-40s whose refractory period was a couple of days. Variety!
@48. UndeadAyn. If he's not interested in consensual power games but just wants to exercise a sense of ownership, then DTMFA.

But just based on the letter, I'd think the guy has internalised shame about wanting to express mastery. Has anyone seriously leveled with him and said, 'it's nothing to be ashamed about--and what's more, I like it!'
@62: I did somehow miss that they were dating, so... maybe.

If she confronts him and he keeps calling her disgusting / can’t quickly get over his revulsion at whatever “the future mother of his child” enjoys and the Madonna-whore dance going on in his head she needs to dump him before it gets weirder.
@62, I submit to you that at a certain point, his reasons why do not matter. His ACTIONS matter.

His actions are that he (a) slaps his partner on the ass and (b) shames her if she openly enjoys it and (c) makes it plain that a woman who enjoys kinky sex is not a person he thinks is good enough to co-parent with. None of those things are very flattering. The first one is certainly cause for a reckoning. The second is cause for second thoughts and the third should be a big red flag to the LW that she might want to think long and hard about what she wants from this relationship. All three together spell out, this person is not a good fit for the LW and his behaviour is kind of gross, and there's no need to stay with that.

His intentions, desires, inner shame, internalized this and psychological that and who cares whatever Do. Not. Matter. Money talks but bullshit walks, and what he's doing is not okay regardless of why he's doing it or not doing it.
@48, @49, &@63 undead ayn rand, and slinky @62: Agreed on all four comments. Ugh, too, if he's playing Madonna-whore head games with SPANK, hassling her about being unfit to be "the future mother of his child"?!? DTMFA!
Actions speak louder then words. I hope SPANK can get out while she still can.
Dan, I am truly amazed at how well you can stomach interacting with Republicans, especially those who stubbornly refuse to listen. I could never attend a caucus or an RNC, especially in D.C. Bless you for your continued vigilance in keeping the sanity.
....and, because I celebrated the coveted honor last week, Congrats! in advance to the next lucky number winner.
A third possibility for JACK's boyfriend, I suppose, is that he's not only into spanking and light kinks along those lines but humiliation, yet he's not expressing the humiliation in a way that's coming across as a kink to JACK. JACK should say, "Dude, if there's nothing wrong with you liking to spank, there's nothing wrong with me liking to be spanked. If you also want to call me a dirty slut, but in a nice way, that's fine [in X context, under Y circumstance" -- or, conversely, tell him she's not into humiliation.

And where on earth are people getting "the future mother of his child" from? The letter says only "I've been seeing this guy." Stop embellishing, and stop running with commenter embellishments! (I'm blaming Undead for this one.)

Congrats in advance to the next commenter, unless someone else is typing simultaneously and it ends up being me.
@64. Slinky. Yes, everything you say is right.

Do we know whether he slaps her on the ass in public or when they're having sex? My assumption has been the latter. He may think he's 'getting carried away' and finds it cause for regret; it could be that he's been socialised into thinking that any frank or uninhibited expression of desire for a female partner is derogatory. Well, of course it isn't; of course, people play with a lower level of inhibition and with the traditional dominant and submissive roles identified with gender during sex. But it could be that this is new to him? I have noticed that many women with male partners writing to Savage Love are notably more 'woke', open-minded and exploratory than the men--even in cultural terms. It's almost the Clinton-wife, Trump-husband phenomenon.

If he's spanking her butt in public and criticizing her for liking it, he's a controlling asshole and DTMFA.

PS Meghan and Harry are very clearly into BDSM.
Harriet @69 (congrats!): I interpreted the butt-slapping to be taking place out of bed. If it's happening during sex, and he's shaming her for liking it, to me that seems even more disturbing, or as if he's trying to incorporate humiliation but failing.
Whether this is in public or private, I think it's a one-last-chance-to-grow-up or DTMFA situation.
@INGAA Hack his laptop or phone. It's in there somewhere.
@66/68: I was describing the sort of person who wants the kink but can’t reconcile it with their more monogamous partner, it never at any point came up in her post so apologies if that wire got crossed! I don’t know his true intentions, it was a speculative “if for this reason, then...”
I thought INGAA’s boyfriend expressed himself very clearly. He considers having sex with same person all the time ‘too vanilla’, and wants to spice it up by fucking people who are not INGAA. At least INGAA can stop trying so hard to keep her boyfriend happy or, more advisedly, stop trying at all.
'I've tried to mix it up' and she doesn't know what it is he WANTS, and when she tries something he looks at her strangely and tells her to stop it....Hon, it's as clear as a blue summer sky, you said it yourself: he wants to open up the relationship. He said so. What he wants is to screw other people. So, take his big toe out of your orifice and send him on his way. He wants to free. Free of you.
Did I miss something? Why is everyone assuming JACK is a woman?
@75: I didn't.
Throw me on the pile of commenters who would appreciate more input from @nocutename in whatever form. Always thoughtful and interesting.

@21 venomlash Multiple LOLs with no refractory periods.
@69 Harriet_by_the_bulrushes: Congrats on scoring this week's lucky number and all the best in 2018! I predict good fortune smiling on you hopefully soon.
@72 undead ayn rand: Oh. Okay. Thanks for clarifying.
@21 venomlash: Yes---agreed with @77 futurecatlady. Your perfect LOL comment repeatedly made my day.
@70 BiDanFan: I couldn't agree more.
@75: I didn't, either.
Pork @75: Hmm, good point. Perhaps because JACK's boyfriend's actions are consistent with those of a misogynist.

Slinky @64: Where was this perfect post when Sportlandia was arguing that a non-consensual face slapper had done nothing wrong if "he thought she would like it"? Sporty, you still here?
Ms Cute - Sure; I'm just thinking that one has to be very careful with improvements. (Maybe this is a rumination on whether the perfect is the enemy of the best.) Rubek "improved" Resurrection so much by adding a little thing here and there that eventually the figure of Irena was pushed into the background; people are so comfortable with women's advice that before long Mr Savage would likely get shoved aside. In his own terminology, the vast majority of advice providers are estrogen-soaked (I omit the equivalent to the offensive second part of his "testosterone-soaked" phrase).Keeping Mr S from turning into a carbon copy of some woman or other would be a harder task than one might think. Or, in Loitering With Intent, perhaps it similar to how Fleur could see the defects when she was proofreading Warrender Chase, but knew that fixing one scene or other would throw off the balance of the whole work.

Are there any women advising who, in your opinion, would benefit from similar male accompaniment? Having seen of late so many accusations lobbed at the enemy, I'd suggest that, while women may be better acquainted with male culture than men with female culture (not quite for the same reasons that gays knows straight culture better than the reverse, but close enough), neither side has a particular advantage in insight into the other's minds or motivations. I'm inclined to file this with your favourite Henry Tilney and his list of things in which excellence is equally divided between the sexes, but I'll provide the possible out of claiming that the paucity of female-dominated fields means that the damage of adding male seasoning to female advice would override any improvement. That seems an acceptable Elliot-Harville point (remind me to use that as a reference in future).
Venn @83: Your point about the ratio of agony aunts to uncles is well taken. I think Dan's doing a great job of advising all genders and orientations; I'd say he might benefit from a second opinion only on matters directly related to female anatomy, such as the example of accidentally penetrating an anus when aiming for a different orifice which Dan does not possess.
@84 amended, an orifice which neither Dan nor his lovers possess. Straight men can probably give a few examples of accidental or near-miss anal intercourse.
@83: At first thought, I agree that the advice-dispensing field seems dominated by women, but on further reflection, think it's not as completely one-sided. The biggest names, the ones who appear in the most general-readership publications are women: "Ann Landers," "Dear Abby," Judith Martin ("Miss Manners"), Amy Dickinson ("Ask Amy"), Carolyn Hax, and of course, our favorite, Emily Yoffe as "Dear Prudence"--just kidding, Mr. Ven, though I'd like your opinion on how Mallory Ortberg is doing in the role.

But there are also Steve Almond (the original "Dear Sugar" for The Rumpus,) Philip Galanes ("Social Q’s" for The New York Times), Kwame Anthonly Applah ("The Ethicist" for The New York Times), and Troy Patterson (as the now-defunct "Gentleman Scholar" for Slate).

And there're Cheryl Strayed as "Dear Sugar" and Salon's Cary Tennis, who are in a league of two (actually, I'd have to put Steve Almond's "Sugar" in there, as well).

It is interesting to me to note that The New York Times has more than one male advice columnist.

Then there are the myriad of lesser-knowns: E.Jean, Dear Jane, etc., many of whom appear in publications or on sites meant primarily for women. But I'm sure that men's magazines or sites have male advice columnists. And then there are the men (or maybe they're "men," because who really knows who writes the columns for some of these magazines) who give advice about dating or marriage or sex from a "man's point of view" for women in publications like Cosmo, Glamor, Good Housekeeping, and the rest. There used to be a "Jake" in one of those, and now I see Cosmo has Logan Hill. One of the magazines used to have a column called something like "Ask a Guy," which now appears to be its own site. There's also "Ask a Grown Man," the video series, produced by Rookie, which gets celebrities to do one-offs. In fact, women's magazines have been including the "(straight) man's perspective" on questions having to do with sex and relationships for a long time.

Whereas behemoths like "Dear Abby," "Ann Landers," and "Miss Manners" usually concerned themselves with other kinds of advice--how to deal with neighbors, family members, etc., very much like "Dear Prudence" today, which only occasionally is about romantic or sexual relationships.

I don't know where I'm going with this, but I think Dan has a distinctive enough "voice" and seems to be secure enough and a strong enough presence to not risk evaporation, should he allow the occasional woman to join him.

Speaking of Dan and female sidekicks, Esther Perel's book is interesting and she thanks Dan in the intro and calls him a kindred spirit.
Happy New Year to you all.
@87: Lavagirl, if you listen to podcasts and like Esther Perel, I highly recommend "Where Should We Begin?"
@86 nocutename: I reiterate: you would be kick-ass at advising. I can see you as a cross between Carolyn Hax and The Advice Goddess (Amy is her first name; I forget her last name, --not Amy Dickinson--but she's in the Cascadia Weekly here in Bellingham) kinda girl. So how'd you like to be our advice goddess?
@87 LavaGirl: I'd be interested in Easter Perel's book, too.
@88 nocutename: Although you were addressing LavaGirl, I will look for "Where Should We Begin?" in my local bookstore.
@88: Auntie Griz, you're too generous!
But thank you.
Esther Perel's "Where Should We Begin?" is a podcast, not a book. You can get it for free. Just go to the iTunes store and download it. It is real live couples doing one-off therapy sessions with her, which they allow to be podcast. Incredible. The woman is amazing.
@78. Auntie Grizelda. Thank you for your good wishes for the upcoming year! Absolutely the same to you and good luck in your course! I'm resolved that--firmly now in middle age--this is going to be my happiest decade. I'm already so much happier in my personal life than I was in my 20s, 30s, even early 40s!

Incidentally I had just the same view as Dan about 'accidental anal' i.e. that a guy unpractised in anal intercourse was trying it on. Happy to stand corrected.
@78. Auntie Grizelda. Thank you for your good wishes for the upcoming year! Absolutely the same to you and good luck in your course! I'm resolved that this decade--now I'm firmly into middle age--will be the happiest of my life. I'm already happier than in my 20s, 30s, even early 40s.....

Incidentally, about 'accidental anal', my reaction was the same as Dan's i.e. that a guy unpractised in anal sex was trying it on. Happy to stand corrected.
Harriet @91/@92: Good, because I can't see how any guy who actually wanted anal sex would have more success by "trying it on" -- a circumstance where his victim would be almost guaranteed to cry out in pain and put an immediate stop to it -- than by asking for consent, proceeding slowly and with lots of lube, etc. Vaginas are located very close to anuses, and as the owner of one of each, I'm surprised that people like you and Dan are surprised that it's a fairly easy mistake to make.

Happy new year to all!
Ms Cute - I accidentally omitted the experimental thought that Men in Advice could be considered approximately the counterpart of Women in Tech; is that close enough?

While I think your intentions are honourable and sufficiently minimal, I am thinking of market forces. Remember the great push to make Ms Lucy a permanency, despite the giggle and sycophancy. (My own complaint was that she was a manifestation of Mr Savage's having one of the more unpleasant gay-reckoning-with-50 moments - you'll recall that at about that time he was still pretending to be 35 - that took the form of, "I could pull chicks if I wanted".) Now, put a sensible woman in that slot, and there's almost no way it would be allowed to remain a monthly feature, especially when all Mr Savage's feminist critics who find him a dreadful misogynist suddenly started approving of him for doing the right thing and urging him to do the righter thing. Remember, Rubek's improvements of his great work didn't start with the idea of pushing the figure of Irena into the background - and in all fairness Mr Savage doesn't seem quite an equivalent of Rubek's. He'd yield easily to pressure to increase your role, as it would lead to an increase in profitability, the general public and even Mr Savage's target audience being more comfortable with women in advice.

This would put you almost in the position of getting to be Maria Bertram when urged by Edmund (whom we know you dislike) to decline the role of Agatha in Lover's Vows (I rather doubt anyone saw Mansfield Park coming). I think your motives would be a bit more pure, and increased time with Mr Savage would not have quite the appeal of private rehearsals with Henry Crawford, but there would be the same plausible reasoning that, if you declined the role, some Julia or other would only accept it (and you can make an excellent guess at whom I'd cast as Julia to your Maria), do it much less well, anger Tom, etc.

As tempting as it is to end on an Austenian note, I'll conclude by wondering what would have happened had Mr Savage become a billionaire some thirty or so years ago.
Happy New Year Dan and your mob and all you mob here. May the new year bring more love 🌹
@90 nocutename: Seriously, I think you truly would kick serious ass, and I bet Dan and everyone would say yes, too. Thanks so much about Ester Perel--I'll check out her free download on iTunes. Happy 2018 and al the best.
@91 & @91 Harriet_by_the_bulrushes: Happy New Year, all the very best to you, and most agreed: the 50's kick ass, don't they? I am SO ready for 2018 and menopause already it isn't funny. I swear---I keep hearing Roseanne Barr (in a "Roseanne" TV episode in which Darlene at 12, is distraught about her first period, Roseanne's response: "Yeah? Well, you won't feel better for another 40 years.")
@95: LavaGirl: : Happy 2018 and all the very best to you, Dan, and everyone. Here's hoping that 2018 proves to be a major improvement over 2017. May the Blue Wave prevail! Viva la Resistance!
Griz at this point is comfortably numb, after 4 glasses of cabernet sauvignon after a heartbreaking loss for the Seattle Seahawks' end of the season game against the Arizona Cardinals. No playoffs this year. We'll get 'em in 2018.
But I am ready for Brad (as J.D.!!!!) and Simon Sez tonight!
Re: JACK - Maybe dumb-ass has conflated the idea of spanking with degradation, and thinks that if you like to be spanked you must like to be degraded, so it's his idea of upping the fantasy by adding pervert-shaming humiliation-talk to the physical play. Possibly you can set him straight about the difference between the aspects you like and the ones you don't.

If that doesn't work, and he's serious about the "that's disturbing" thing, tell him, "You don't seem to be clear on the concept that consent makes 100% of the difference between sex play and rape. If it is "disturbing" that I enjoy being slapped on the ass, then it is ten times as disturbing that you only like doing it if I don't want it to happen.

"You don't have permission to do things to me that I don't want to happen. If your enjoyment of the act is predicated on the idea that I honestly don't want it, then by definition you just lost permission to do it. And if you do something to me that you don't have permission to do, then we will treat you as a sex offender, and let the state legal apparatus explain it to you.

"Now, tell me one more time about whether you prefer it to be "disturbing" that I consent to your physical acts. Because I can always stop."
I can't help wondering if STOP advocates that all lesbians who through whatever circumstances happen to be raising sons should surrender them immediately? Because by her reasoning, a lesbian doesn't have fucking clue about what it means to be male and therefore has no business raising one.

The other thing her reasoning implies is that literally nobody is qualified to offer advice to hetero couples, because they involve both a man and a woman, and no single person has the personal perspective to be able to advise the opposite half of that couple.
Nice spread (ha ha) of topics and responses in this week's column!
Regarding CUMU, I guess my view is in the minority, but I do think it is reasonable to sometimes get a kiss from a partner I've just gone down on. I'm certainly willing to kiss someone who has just given me oral.
Regarding JACK, I initially assumed the writer was a guy. Either way, this dynamic is not working for JACK, and I don't think the situation will improve.
Nice to see you back, Mr. Venn.
@61, agreed, must be to point of satisfaction, not number of orgasms, which can be zero to dozens depending on the person and is separate from satisfaction. I think a lot of guys think that just because they made a woman orgasm once or a few times they're good. This is incorrect.
101. BiDan. It would never occur to me to have sex without lube. OK, there could be some roughhouse rubbing, like scrubbing with a towel after e.g. playfully flicking it at a partner's ass, but as soon as sex got down to anything genital, all parts would be well-oiled, whether it turned out there was going to be ass-eating or anal or not. So perhaps the idea of non-lubricated penetration, of whatever opening, seems abrupt and discourteous to me.

My experience of fucking women isn't extensive enough here, but I've thought a man would need either to be easily aligned with either fanny or arse, or to angle into position, to aim, for any sort of penetrative sex. It may be that there's more clambering and fitting in gay male sex and that this sort of preconception is carrying over into people like Dan's and my idea of how easy this 'slippage' is.

    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.