LW1: how is a possible answer “both” and not “neither of these also-rans, but a third man yet to be determined”? She’s got time to find someone new and better, if she dumps the husband pronto.

About getting blamed by friends and family: likely worth it to escape this hell. But just in case, tell the community blabbermouth about the no-sex part. When word gets around, the sympathy will be with you.

LW1, I'd say your attraction to your ex says alot more about where you are with your husband than where you could be with your ex. Leave your husband. You want to. Will other people judge you? Yes. It'll be a great opportunity to be the bigger person. Don't badmouth your husband, not so much for him, as for you. Accept and move on. No sex at 30? There's gotta be a better life.

LW1 should disentangle the two men. Focus on the question of whether you want to stay married independently of the new/old boyfriend.

@ nocutename 4: Absolutely, she should. It's fine to use the ex as a catalyst to examine your present life, but don't assume the only options are "stay with husband" or "leave him for ex." Though it doesn't really sound like she has much debate left on the question of staying with her husband, especially if she created her own signoff acronym. She's not asking if she should leave, she's asking if she can without being selfish.

Yes. Yes, you can. It's perfectly reasonable to decide you're no longer willing to put up with your husband changing the terms of your marriage without your input. That's not selfish, that's knowing what you want out of your life and relationship.

@2 "But just in case, tell the community blabbermouth about the no-sex part. When word gets around, the sympathy will be with you."

Ugh. Painful. But you might have a point.

People who marry someone who's a dud in the sack are bat-shit crazy (unless, of course, he/she is loaded and that's what you're after anyway or you just want a good friend with a wicked sense-of-humor). But acknowledging that you're the type of person who needs some action downtown and marrying silly putty? Bat-shit! And why did he marry you? To get a maid?

No, you don't want to hop out of the skillet into the fire. Dump the hubby if you want, but you know what" When Romeo started talking about wanting a biological child, I heard an alarm. This day and age, with so many unwanted and needful children around, some guy talks about needing to make a Little Him kind of sets my stomach sour. I'd dump Romeo, too, and spend some time discovering who you are - including what makes you scream in bed. Good luck, my sister.

@6 I saw this scenario play out in my own community—first Wife left Husband, then Wife told Gossip that Husband had refused her sex for 8 years. (Both Wife and Husband are very attractive.). My first thought was, why would you tell Gossip such personal information when she’s just going to spread it around? And then the penny dropped...

The ex "sounds like the answer to all my problems".
You know who else would be the answer to all your problems? Many of the billions of people who aren't your husband. My point is you can jump ship and have plenty more options than your ex; deal with your marriage without thinking of the ex as your only escape.

"something I've never seen in my inbox...holy moly—the sex got a fuck of a lot better after the wedding".
I'm always amazed that people are surprised that "the passage of time and/or muttering of vows isn't going to fix it". It's amazing how unrealistic most people's expectations about nearly everything are.

Here, I rewrote the second LW's letter:
"I am a gay man who enjoys servicing closeted men. I submit to them because I believe that emotional distance is easy and I have not been shown decent dominance or am unable to emotionally handle it. In exchange for them doing nothing whatsoever, thus letting me feel accomplished by doing everything, I let them stay closeted. It's way easier to swallow my unresolved issues than spit them out, so that's literally what I'm doing. I have made a long-term habit of this and now don't know any other coping mechanism."

But I suppose I'm biased since I do the inverse, I let straight (closeted) guys act submissive toward me on the condition that they come out as bi or gay. I run a gay superiority blog and you would just not even believe the kinds of responses I get. LW2 may have his closeted dick, but that's a tired game to be playing. Flipping the script is where it's at.

The first lw is all over the place. She's absolutely ready to leave her husband, not because there is no sex (and she's almost 30) and because she wants kids and her husband now says he doesn't, but because her old ex showed up on the scene. So she'd leave her husband for another man, but not because the marriage is sexless and they differ on having children.

She says that leaving her husband for her ex sounds like the answer to all her problems, but when considering leaving her husband because they have major incompatibilities, she says, "I also worry that people would blame me because it will look like I left because things were tough." What does she think people would say if she left her husband to get (back) together with her ex-boyfriend?

It's interesting that she thinks that leaving one's spouse for someone else is somehow more morally upright or justified than leaving merely because you are unhappy.

IMDONE sounds like one of these women that is afraid to be alone. Her husband is a mess, maybe a tragic/sad one if it's all due to health issues, but a mess, nonetheless. However, she doesn't contemplate leaving him until or unless the ex-boyfriend is interested. Honey, you want kids. Just admit it. Tick, tock, tick, tock, you're biological clock is running. Divorce your husband, date some men who damn well enjoy sex, and then look for Hubby #2. At that point, settle down and make some babies. But, damn, stand on your own two feet, first.

WOW, again, this week. "Double baggage" (re WAW). That's a first.

@11 nocutename, re IMDONE: Thank you and bless you for so beautifully summarizing what I was about to say too, in response to IMDONE's letter to Dan.
I'm veering a little off topic, but IMDONE's situation serves (me) as a reminder of my thankfully long past marital nightmare (Dan, you had mentioned double baggage?). If I had had my head screwed on straight when I was in the Navy I would never have married to begin with. Two years into the disastrous marriage, my future ex was in San Fransisco during Fleet Week, and his equally messed up parents drove north and stayed in a hotel during his week there in port. One night he was rip roaring drunk after his parents chewed him out for our not having any kids yet. All slurry over long distance, my future ex ranted: 'If you won't have kids with me, I'll go out and find someone who will!'. I should have just let him go THEN, after only two years (jesus--what the fuck did I know? I actually wanted everything back then to work out!). He did know about my not planning on having kids, so we weren't married under false pretenses. But I sure had to battle my ass off to avoid unwanted pregnancy.

@12 BadBreathMommy: I agree with you on your advice to IMDONE, that she should just leave her spouse if she wants kids and he clearly does not. Maybe IMDONE's getting back together with her ex would work out. But only she knows for sure. There's a reason he's her ex.
Forgive my long-winded comment here, but the mention of a "biological clock ticking" caught my attention. Unlike IMDONE, however, I was in an abusive marriage and did NOT want children at all. My situation was the exact opposite: I felt no biological clock ticking, but just about everyone else around me did when I was in my 20s and 30s. My then future ex, his parents, sibs, friends, co-workers, even the U.S. Government, etc. laid the guilt on thick for me to have kids way back then. Their reasons were really stupid, too (i.e.: 'all our friends have kids', 'I want to leave a legacy', my then spouse insisted he'd 'hold my hand' in the delivery room as if that made all the difference and among many more, the worst: my equally abusive in-laws--who couldn't stand to be around children, and wouldn't have been around to help raise any we might have had---stubbornly insisted we "owed" them grandchildren! Only my parents remained understanding, loving and supportive of my choice to remain childless, knowing it was a wise decision on my part with a violent tempered, emotionally unstable spouse. I was later able to just walk away. IMDONE can, too.

I feel a bit sorry for IMDONE, but only a bit. Her husband told her up front he had "a low libido." OK, he should have said "I'm asexual," but he gave ample opportunity to IMDONE to exit and she didn't. And now she is calling a sexless marriage "a decent life"? And worries that "it will look like I left because things were tough," when she's thinking of leaving because things are tough?
Woman, you want a relationship that includes sex and a life that includes children. This man wants neither of these things. Your ex does, but so do MILLIONS of other men out there. You're 30. Don't wait to start over until you're 40. Move on now.

Dan suggested the obvious open relationship, but I don't think that would work in a situation where openness would mean not just accepting other men having sex with your wife but raising another man's kid. Nope, divorce is the only solution here.

Great answer to WAW! I was chortling when I read that straight guys have less baggage than gay ones. Hahaha, try dating one and you'll see that this is not true.

Victorian @5: "use the ex as a catalyst to examine your present life" -- Bingo. The reconnection with the ex shouldn't say to her that what she really wants is to be with the ex again. It should merely serve as a contrast between what she has and what she wants. If it will help kick her in the ass to start divorce proceedings, then she should have a rebound fling with the ex. (She should be up front that it's a rebound fling; for pete's sake don't literally use this guy and play with his feelings.) Once she gets a reminder that other men enjoy sex, she should start dating some new ones.

Lionface @10: "I run a gay superiority blog"
Now that's telling. What, pray tell, is "gay superiority"?

Nocute @11: Great catch. Perhaps IMDONE has stayed with her husband because she's one of those people who absolutely has to be in a relationship, however good or bad that relationship may be. I'm revising my advice above to state that she should leave Husband, have a rebound fling with Ex, and then stay completely single for a year and figure herself out. That will still give this (not "almost") 30-year-old time to find her breeding pair.

IMDONE: You aren't doing your husband a favor by staying on these terms. You aren't some sort of magic unicorn fairy that is the only possible one for your husband. There are asexual women women out there that don't want kids who would make your husband very happy - and you're preventing him from having that. I'm sure some of them have good jobs too and could support him, and if they don't, so what? So he'd have less money? That's not the end of the world.

Don't leave for your ex - he's your ex for a reason and diving right in to kids and marriage is a good way to have a second divorce. Leave because you and hubby are fundamentally incompatible. He doesn't want kids or sex and you do. If you leave him in an honest and honorable manner, after a cooling-off period, you'll probably be able to be friends. You'll probably get along much better now that there's no sex or kids resentment on either side. If you cheat on him first you'll blow up any chance of keeping him as a friend.

If you want kids and sex, you deserve the chance to find a partner who also does. If your husband married you, he deserves to be honestly broken up with, not cheated on and lied to.
Do the right thing for yourself and him - divorce.

I wonder if WAW appreciates the irony of saying that he, a gay man, stays away from gay men because gay men have too much baggage. :)

Lionface @ 10
I agree that there’s no such thing as a baggage-free person and glad you find people who are interested in what you have to offer. It’s still possible that LW finds others that suit him.
Submission to some can be upper hand to others, and insisting on following your rules can also come across as insecurity.
Not that it matters.

I agree with nocute @ 11 that “the first lw is all over the place.”
There are way too many issues she’s trying to deal with, and I’d suggest some alone time to figure things out. Her vision of living happily ever after, be it getting married or reuniting with an ex, is not a stable starting point.

I don't think the best advice to IMDONE is 'both', I think it's probably 'neither'.

She doesn't have relationships (it would seem) with people she dislikes. With people with whom there's some temperamental incompatibility that makes day-to-day practicalities unhappy or the theme of complaint. She esteems, perhaps in some ways loves, her husband, and left her ex 'on good terms', and would consider marrying and starting a family with him. My supposition is that she wouldn't form a partnership with anyone she couldn't commit to. Her choice, then, should be guided by what she wants--sex (at least some sex) and children. There is nothing selfish in weighing potential partners up by considering whether they can provide this.

Nor is there anything selfish, or 'cheating', in thinking she may eventually be with other men than her husband.

IMDONE is much more emotionally and sexually conservative than most Savage Love readers or correspondents. She believes in the commitments she made entering a relationship. Her presumption is that relationships are closed; that people in them unstintingly show love and support for their partners in their difficulties. And all this is good. But equally, relationships must offer essential forms of satisfaction to the partners who, by and large, make sacrifices. IMDONE's marriage is not doing that at the moment, and she knows as much.

She is thirty. She is a good person, kind, thoughtful. Professionally stable, on the way to being sufficiently financially successful. Why can she not get herself out there and find someone to have great sex with? And then to have kids with? She fears disloyalty to her husband. OK--but, as Dan said, she can show up for him in other ways. He can't give her what she wants. He knows this. It's not fair for him to keep her--other than to keep, actively to maintain, the friendship. He--both of them--must know this, too.

But the issue here is why IMDONE supposes she is so restricted in her options. Her choices are 1) a man whose 'successful' treatment for multiple mental and physical illnesses did not include his learning to be able to have sex, or learning to try, or not be irritated or defensive when the topic arose, and 2) a man who cuddled his ex at a party as a tacit way of asking whether she wanted to end her committed marriage and hook up again? No. Neither of these are stellar on paper, are they? Why does she think herself bound to these people as future life-partners?

@2, 3, 4, 5. Exactly to all of these responses.

@2 Fresh. Yes, it's right to offer IMDONE reassurance she will have people's support on leaving a sexless marriage. 'Why did you leave him?' 'We hadn't had sex in eighteen months. And I want sex. And I want kids'. Can she really imagine anyone, even in the most conservative social circles, judging her badly for leaving when the times got tough?

@11. Nocute. I don't think IMDONE supposes that leaving her spouse for her is more 'justified' or 'upright' than leaving him period.

It's that she doesn't think there will be anyone for her otherwise. Perhaps she is frightened of taking the plunge and finding no takers when she is single. Or she has confidence issues, because (maybe) she has had few relationships in the past and little to no experience of searching or making herself available? But--in all probability--finding a partner will be easier than she imagines. There are a lot more compatible men with her than her husband out there--out almost anywhere.

@17. Traffic. Excellent point about asexual women as potential wives for Mr IMDONE.

LW1 sounds like many of my bridge players, who would like to play bridge better than they do, but (however much the effort required enters into considerations) really want, much more than they want actually to BE better players, to be CALLED really good players. To some extent, this is my fault, as I played with a number of them to get them the last gold points they needed to be awarded the title of Life Master, but I can assure the assembled company that they would rather have the title than know how to execute a double squeeze on purpose.

Mr Savage's approach to L1 of trying to get OS people to act more SS (of course if LW1 leaves H1 she'll abandon him; she's way too responsive to social pressure) may be a crusade that ought not to be supported much, but he did so well on L2 that he nets a plus for the week.

vennominion - what are you talking about?

It's rare to see the comments section agree on anything! But it looks like we all agree that LW1 should not be poly with her husband and her ex. Come on, Dan. This is a very clear case of the ex being a catalyst for what she already wants. He seems like the solution to all her problems because she wants him to be. She should leave her husband because she's unhappy with him and spend some time dating men who like sex and want kids.

@22: Harriet, you're probably right that IMDONE is afraid of being alone, and it seems scarier to leave something for nothing than something for something else. I could have written " it seems scarier to leave someONE for no ONE than someONE for NOthing else," because I think that's where the lw's head is. But I think if she were to think of it in the way I first wrote it, it might seem less scary. Because being divorced is not nothing; it's just something DIFFERENT than being married.

Still, if one is socially conservative (I agree that IMDONE probably is), it's hard to walk out on what is perceived to be a successful marriage. And I understand. In our culture, there are accepted and "acceptable" reasons for leaving one's spouse, and they tend to be:
1. Spouse was physically abusive
2. Spouse cheated on you

These are by far the most common and socially sanctioned reasons. People often don't understand why a woman would leave a decent man who's a "good provider" (though in this case, it sounds like the couple contribute roughly equally to the household finances).
So yeah, if IMDONE leaves her physically ill husband--this nice guy who doesn't beat her and hasn't had an affair--for "no reason" she's going to get flak. She should learn to stare it down. None of their business. Her life; her choices; her decisions; her consequences.

But say that IMDONE isn't quite ready to make a socially unsanctioned decision. Well, there are some more lower-level acceptable reasons for leaving a marriage on that list:
3. Spouse has an alcohol/addiction problem that is wreaking havoc with spouse's and your life
4. Spouse gambles excessively or has embezzled money
5. YOU AND YOUR SPOUSE DISAGREE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE CHILDREN

So IMDONE has her socially acceptable "reason" in that list. She can legitimately claim #5 and, since she is the one who wants kids (and sacred motherhood is being denied her), people will understand her decision.

IMDONE, familiarize yourself with the phrase: "[husband's name] is a great guy, but we've grown apart."
And if you are almost 30, there's still time to find someone else who wants what you do (sex and children).

@27. Nocute. You're right that IMDONE may cop some flak.

What do you think of another relevant reason?: 6. We haven't had sex in e.g. eighteen months and if we had it, I'm guessing it would only be to have kids. Based on your assumptions about IMDONE and her social circle, do you think that would count as a socially sanctioned rationale for leaving? (To me, it probably would).

Traffic @25: I rarely know what Venn is talking about!

Nocute @27: Odd how "6. Spouse is frigid" is seen as a socially acceptable reason for a man to leave (or cheat on) his wife, but not for a woman to leave her husband. (And it could also be argued that "spouse is physically abusive" is a socially acceptable reason for a woman but not a man. Yay sexism.) But I agree: "I want kids and spouse does not" is indeed an accepted reason to leave spouse. She doesn't need to mention the sex withholding when giving her reasons for ending the marriage.

@16 A form of orientation play in which gay men are considered superior over bi and straight men, whom they have authority over and own. It's for kink purposes, I do actually help guys through the coming out process on occasion (and I genuinely don't appreciate self-closeted men, as I've stated too often) but generally it's just for masochistic bi and gay men who like authoritarian D/s fantasies, humiliation, cuckolding, forced bi stuff, and the transgressive element of orientation play, but who are tired of the "gay guy submitting to straight guys" dynamic. A small city could be powered by Kinsey spinning in his grave over my use of his scale as a caste system. Imagine if a queer theory professor had a wet dream that turned into a nightmare halfway through.

In the end it's really just a way for me to neatly wrap up a bunch of kinks I like while also helping me process a lot of throughly unwanted and otherwise detrimental negative feelings toward closeted and low-scale guys in a way that ends up producing something positive (their pleasure) rather than just a lot of shitty behavior on my part toward men who did little or nothing to deserve it. My husband is bi and I love him about a billion times more than all my kinks and all the other guys I've ever known put together, so it's not serious, it's fantasy for the willing.

@19 His submission is a form of control, yes. I'm not seriously suggesting he needs to change, if this works for him then that's great. However, I do think he's writing this letter in the kind of time that I would write one in when I'm in a fantasy space. I don't think it can seriously be argued that the men he sleeps with are heterosexual unless they don't know he's male, and he gave no indicator that he's doing this anonymously. He's invested in his fantasy and more power to him, but this is how he controls his relationship to his identity and orientation and the men he finds attractive. It is transactional, they want sex without having to come out or be honest with themselves, and he wants sex that gives him a great deal of control without responsibility after the fact. So long as it works for all parties, that's perfectly fair and fine. I'm not sure how I feel about him writing the letter as if their shared fantasies are actually true (they're not), but that's between him and Dan.

@ 25, 29 - Strange, this is one of the rare occasions that I actually understood what Venn was talking about!

*tone, not time, excuse my autocorrect.

@28: Harriet, I don't think that "we haven't had sex in 18 months" is a socially acceptable reason for leaving one's husband in the socially conservative/traditional world I am assuming the LW lives in, especially not if the spouse leaving is a woman; ESPECIALLY not if the husband has health issues. Women are supposed to sacrifice themselves for the sake of their marriages; women aren't supposed to prioritize sex all that much--not over a good, stable marriage to a nice man--a good guy.

She would be seen as selfish and immature. I don't think this is a reason to stay in a marriage you have to talk yourself into liking, but I acknowledge that that is the attitude she's likely to get from her social circle, and society at large.

By the way, I re-read her letter and I'm not sure what is going on re: the husband's health. Here's what she said:
"Then we got married, and suddenly he had no libido at all. He blamed health problems and assured me he was trying to address them. Despite being diagnosed and successfully treated for multiple physical and mental health issues over time, things only got worse. After four years of marriage, the relationship has become strictly platonic. I can't even start a conversation about intimacy without him getting irritated. After we married, he also decided he no longer wanted children, and I eventually convinced myself it was probably for the best, given his health. We built our dream home, adopted a pet, and built an outwardly successful life together.
. . .
I don't want to leave my hubby and lose the decent life we built together. Plus, my leaving would hurt my husband's feelings, his health, and his finances. I also worry that people would blame me because it will look like I left because things were tough."

So these health issues were successfully treated, but she has decided that it's "probably for the best, given his health" that they don't have children. I can't tell if she means that whatever his health issues are, they're hereditary and she worries that their potential children would suffer from them, or that the strain of having children would trigger a recurrence of his health issues. But then she lists concern for her husband's health as being one of the reasons for not leaving him. Does that mean that she sees herself as his caretaker? Is she responsible for his treatment? Or is she worried about his mental health if she leaves--that he would slip (back?) into a depression (itself a health issue) and then stop taking care of any additional physical health issues he might have?

But again, IMDONE, you have to learn to let yourself off the hook for your husband's health. If you left, it would indeed hurt your husband's feelings, and it would hurt both of your finances; but he alone should be responsible for maintaining his health.

@15/BiDanFan hit upon something that I saw, but which Dan elided, namely that IMDONE's husband let her know about his low libido and that she had plenty of time to get to know whether the amount of sex he was willing to provide was enough to satisfy IMDONE. So IMDONE isn't a spouse cheated out of her sex life by a lying boyfriend / fiance, she someone who made a bad decision about whom to marry. While I think IMDONE needs to own that mistake, that does not mean she needs to settle for a sexless marriage and no children if she wants an active sex life and children. She is way to young to pay for that mistake for the next 55 years.

That is the only issue she needs to resolve. The ex-boyfriend, what other people will say, how her husband will react or cope, is extraneous to that issue. And as others have said, leaving the marriage is not synonymous with abandoning her husband. She can help him as a friend. So based on what she said in her letter, I think she should exit this marriage post haste get back into the dating pool and place a higher priority on the quality and quantity of sex she gets from her partner, and their interest in having children.

"A guy's dick is his proudest possession"
...um, what kind of guys have you been blowing?

When she asked: "Is it selfish of me to even consider leaving at this point?" ... I decided that she could really benefit from personal therapy.

@36: EricaP, I agree.

@30 your blog sounds like a refreshing change of pace from the usual "straight guy worship" stuff that's been done a million times.

In theory, I disagree that any guy capable of having sex with a man can't be straight because some people are able to enjoy sex with a person they're not attracted to, and no recip head from a dude could be a logical extension of that. But in practice I agree that outside of situational homosexuality, it's far more likely that a "straight" guy who actively seeks out sex with other men is just a closeted bisexual. I think the "straight guy worship" fetish actively encourages bi men who mostly date women to stay in the closet.

@38 Thank you! I enjoy the way phrasing ideas in certain terms can make a true but emotionally sterile point into something people really feel. Pornography, even pornographic commentary, is art, and although plenty of it is not very good, I like to think that there's plenty of ways in which porn can improve people's gut responses to the world. I respect my colleagues who make material for guys like LW2, but considering I've already helped a couple guys come out, I like to think I'm doing some good in the world.

As for no-attraction sex, I don't think that really happens. At least, not without indicating something underlying it. There's more to sex, even quickies, than base mechanics. I don't deny that it's possible for straight men to have sex with gay/bi men, but only in very specific and usually not-okay circumstances. Whether or not the straight-ID'd men who identify this way will ever think about it deeply is a separate issue, and since I don't respect them, it's not an issue I care about. For my part, I'm not going to support what seems to me like strenuous mental gymnastics ("I'm not gay because of X, Y, and Z!").

@39 - Yup, there's usually something else going on with sex without attraction and barring something toxic, it's usually a one off. A lesbian friend of mine had sex with a dude once largely out of curiosity; she said it felt good but was emotionally unsatisfying and she wasn't interested in doing it again.

@ 35 - Guys "without baggage", obviously.

I agree with the "doesn't want children" as the best broadly socially acceptable reason for IMDONE, should she need one beyond "we've grown apart, I'm not happy". As an aside, I'm amazed how many people seem to need to field extremely personal questions from people who are neither close friends or close family. I know many divorced people in my local (small, rural) community and it wouldn't cross my mind to ask why they split up with their exes.

As to low-baggage... and SS attraction or lack thereof. Whether we call men who like to get their dicks sucked by openly gay/bi men heteroflexible or bisexual or straight (I personally wouldn't use the latter term but whatever), I think the lack of baggage is less the function of the closetedness and more likely to be a result of them likely to be bisexual-but-heteroromantic. So any feelings (which I doubt are completely absent) are unlikely to involve a desire to form any kind of relationship with associated intimacy, drama, deeper investment etc. In the same way that a man who hires sw's might do it to avoid similar issues while getting his kinks scratched.

@43 Being closeted is a ton of baggage, but to know you even have it, you have to be willing to consider your sexual partners desirable people. Some of these men, probably many of them, never consider their partners that way. It's just mechanics. It's a fair trade so long as they are similarly just parts to the men who blow them, but it's always risky.

Lionface @30: Thanks for the explanation. So it's like the equivalent of femdom only with orientation instead of gender. That explains why you immediately went to a D/s interpretation of WAW's sex life. I don't personally see anything -inherently- dominant or submissive in the act of giving or receiving oral sex, though, as with anything, it can be given a D/s element if the participants like that.

I also think that there are closeted guys who like getting head from gay men and straight guys who like getting head from gay men. As recently discussed, a straight man may find a guy like WAW's offer tempting for the very same reason WAW does: they see a gay man as having "less baggage" than the women who would want to attach a relationship to their sexual favours. Until there are comparable numbers of cis women out there offering free, no-recip blowjobs, I think it can be seriously argued that some of these guys are heterosexual.

Nocute @33: I interpreted "I eventually convinced myself it was probably for the best, given his health" as meaning he wouldn't be healthy enough to care for children.

Sublime @34: To an extent -- he said "low libido" when after they married he revealed he meant "no libido." "Low" is subjective -- some people would describe a "low libido" person as someone who wants sex once a month, but that might sound "high" to someone as asexual as Mr IMDONE. He did trick her to some extent by putting in some effort to have sex while they were dating, then shutting off completely once they wed. Isn't that considered grounds for an annulment even by the Catholic Church?

And specifically Lionhead @ 10 & 30

I totally love the idea, because it sooo kicks the ass of the normative, inverting more than one cultural assumption.

It also chimes with me big way personally, as I was once involved with a tormented/closeted af bisexual humiliation slut (technical term, no judgement here) and this is exactly how I managed to press his and my kinky buttons at the same time (I don't find homeorotic desires repulsive or shameful at all but just hot, so I couldn't convincingly mock his desperate need for dick, but I found it VERY easy to mock his repression and unwarranted closetedness in eroticised humilation play that pretty much amounted to "bi-and-proud" (as I'm mostly female ;) superiority while respecting/being gentler with his hangups out-of-dynamic.

Lionface- You seem to be on a mission, and I wonder if being a missionary is taking away some of the fun or maybe part of.

What, is it my fault that there are people in the assembled company who didn't teach themselves bridge from a book at age four?

Anyway, with Tony retiring from the Supremes, I wonder what odds Ladbrokes will put out for the overturns of all his pro-SS opinions.

If people don't care to communicate (which, to be redundant means) in a way that others know what the fuck they're talking about, I'm certainly not going to care (for them or for me or anyone else). Hell, at this point even if I did know I probably wouldn't care.

@46 Thank you! I'm so pleased you like the setup, and I'm so flattered a femdom would approve! It's wonderful to hear you helped someone closeted come to grips with it, that sounds very familiar to me by now. The fastest way to a man's head is through his pants, absolutely. He lucked out finding you, I can only imagine how much pleasure that must have caused him but no doubt it was extreme.

Like I said in my first post, you would just not believe the kind of positive response I've received from people, what is this material for if not to experiment with? Power dynamics are templates that can and should be played with, and I see no reason why straight men should remain the idealized 'taboo dominants' for males when actual straight men have neither the capacity nor the interest to truly play that role. Subverting tropes while taking all their power is very fun, especially when much of what I'm saying does contain a true core premise. For example, gay men are definitely better at dominating other gay/bi men than straight men are, I think that's obvious. Things are so much more intense when they're just exaggerated versions of what's really the case, and I love having that kind of impact on other people's pleasure. To be able to use their libido to improve their self-image is so nice!

@45 I'm very flattered you would compare me to femdoms! Dominatrices show the rest of us how it's done, I can only hope to live up to that. It was the overall tone of his letter. He seems very protective of the men he blows and very proud of how essentially doting he is in a sexual sense, and is proud of how deferential he is to their comfort and pleasure. Those to me are the hallmarks of an active submissive. I'm making an educated guess based on the experiences I've had and the people I've known.

If I was regularly having power tops plow me silly, it would be difficult for me to honestly state I am an exclusive top, even if I said it was more convenient since I didn't have to put in effort to please my partner except showing up. Convenience doesn't change the nature of the act I'm performing, or my role in it. There's a term for men who regularly have gay sex but state they are straight, "closeted."

This is a semantic game to protect the egos of men who say one thing and then do another, and I'm not playng it. I find the dissonance between their behavior and their position on their partners nasty. It's not my business unless they want to submit to me, though.

@47 Used to be bad, now it's good! All this used to be extremely negative until I realized it wasn't going to go away, now I just channel it into positive outlets. I do my best to bring people (especially the people I would have had unwarranted and unfair biases toward) pleasure and makes their lives better, even in a small capacity. It's a huge relief!

Hmm, I suppose 'power bottom' would be more appropriate than 'active submissive,' but he's certainly the active one between himself and his 'straight' partners.

@35 venomlash and @41: Ricardo: Thanks for the LOL--I needed that!

@36 EricaP: I third it. Good call on IMDONE.

I think a lot of the commenters here are a little too quick to press the “exes are exes for a reason” button. LW is 30. She has been married for 4 years. They dated for 3 years prior to that. If you do the math, she met her husband around age 23. The old boyfriend would have to have been before that. She writes that she and Mr. Ex parted on good terms. There are about a million reasons for a couple in their teens or very early 20s to break up without falling into the “exes for a reason” category. Maybe they dated in high school and then went to different colleges. Maybe they landed their first professional jobs in different cities. Of course that doesn’t automatically mean she should rekindle things with the ex. But I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad idea to give it a go with someone she loved when she was very young and presumably broke up with over life circumstances.

@54 StPaulReader: You make some good, valid points. Like I commented in @14, however, only IMDONE knows the reason for her breakup with her ex-boyfriend prior to her marriage. We can only speculate. Maybe their getting back together would work out the second time around--especially if he wanted kids, too. That's still up to them. Considering my own shared past unhealthy experience with LTRs (please read @13 and @14 again if you still have any doubts) I don't think I'm a "little too quick to press the exes are exes for a reason" button. I think I can say with confidence that if you'd ever been married to someone like my ex-spouse you'd have run for your life, too.

Lionface @50: To me, the passages you quote described someone who has honed his strategy for getting what he wants from men who wouldn't normally give it. I agree that men who "regularly" get oral sex from men shouldn't claim to be straight, but WAW's partners don't necessarily do it regularly; WAW may be the exceptional dude who, through patience, tact and timing, convinced his straight friends to put aside their straightness for the sake of a mutually satisfying experience. There's a term for men who are solely attracted to women but might occasionally let a man suck their cocks: "heteroflexible."

Dominating "straight" men sounds exactly what I'd like to be doing if I were a gay dude!

StPaul @54: Good point, but I still think she'd have a better shot at long-term compatibility with a third -- or fourth, or fifth -- man.

LW1 - husband, ex, both or NEITHER.

There's a great big world out there. You are not limited to these two people.

@56 I suppose I just can't see it, but it could be more that the idea of giving something worth so much to someone who deserves so little revolts me. I an pleased WAW is happy but the thought of touching someone so spineless they aren't even out yet is nauseating, unless it's to punish or humiliate them. For many submissives, the thought of blowing a straight man (or for that matter, a biphobic gay man) is arousing because they would never do it, it's arousing because it disgusts. I respect that in fantasy, but I cannot picture it in reality. It's like the difference between a Nazi uniform fetish and actually having sex with a national socialist, they are two very different things that warrant two very different responses.

But in the end, the proof is in the pudding. WAW has infrequent sex with whatever men happen to care the least about him, and has trouble in his daily life and with intimacy, surprise surprise. I could be upset or I could just remember I have a husband I love, and appreciate that this kind of material is sickening but excellent mental fuel for my side projects. In that sense, I thank WAW for his contribution.

I'm very glad you like my ideas, though! I always aim to please.

Phone, why are you auto-capitalizing nazi? Android, you & I need to have a talk.

@58 Good point as to IMDONE"s 4th option. Just get out of the unhappy marriage and spend some time/effort to identify what exactly she wants in her life, and make a plan to seek it. IMHO what she did at age 23 was marry the first guy who she thought would marry her. There are people who are terrified of being alone and wind up in unhappy life situations as a result. I am acquainted with more than one married woman whose driving force is to avoid abandonment.

LR2 is just another old fool who thinks these guys are "straight". Bi maybe, but there is not an endless font of straight guys who just think "a mouth is a mouth". Most are just closeted, or they might even be gay but just put "straight" on their profile/ad so that a million fools like this guy think they are getting a straight guy. Don't ask me how I know this could be true.

@62 "I've never done anything like this before, don't tell my girlfriend" I tell him as I text aforementioned girlfriend to let her know I'll be home late because I'm getting my dick sucked.

@62 Amen. The fetish for the quickie with the closeted guy arose among closeted men for whom it was their way of life. Then they started coming out, but many took their mental habits and coping mechanisms with them. I don't blame the old guard for this because the circumstances under which these things took place warranted them at the time. Now, it's very far from the case and has devolved into a masochistic exercise in coddling. Or, if they're smart, just an exercise in roleplaying.

@63 I have to laugh, I've had multiple closeted guys ask me if I've "ever fucked a straight dude before" as they try to flirt and it cracks me up every time. "No, you let me know when you find one who's willing" is usually a good way to get them flustered.

Dan's answer was great up until the 'open relationships solve everything' bit. Even if the husband was willing to open the relationship, and there's no evidence that he is, I doubt he'd be willing to raise someone else's kid. That's a bridge too far for even the most open-minded and compassionate individuals.

LW your ex may not be your One True Love but meeting him has made you realize you aren't happy in your relationship and haven't been for a long time.

Learn from out political climate that doubling down on a bad decision doesn't make it a good one. Unless your husband is dependent on you for care he will survive.

End things quickly and cleanly and remember to hold out for what you want.

IMDONE'S letter saddened me because she told the story I've been whining about during my relationship, and we just noted our 20-year anniversary. She told me when we married that she wasn't into sex, while I knew that on my scale of 1 to 10 sex was a 14. Still we got married, and we have fights or at least hurt feelings about sex every week.

It's not just women who feel it's socially inappropriate to prioritize sex. I would have been ridiculed for breaking off an engagement with an otherwise perfect woman simply because she has no affirmative interest in sex. I was wrong and wish I'd had the guts to end it there, for both our sakes, because as frustrated and neglected as I feel, she feels inadequate and put upon to engage in something that just doesn't matter to her. Two kids and a middle age letter, it's too late for me. IMDONE, you're only 30. Save yourself!

Dan's wrong: as so many commenters have said, IMDONE faces two decisions. Deciding to get out of a relationship that will hang on her for decades, at the price of looking irrational for a few months, is one. [No, because so many people accept dysfunctional sex as the natural consequence of a long-term relationship, she won't get universal sympathy when she says she's leaving because she's not getting it regularly.]

The other is whether to re-hook up with a guy she broke up with. IMDONE, I'm not so concerned about this one, but keep in mind that he looks about 200% better because you're so drained from your marriage. Didn't you break up with him for a reason?

@59. Lionface. Wanting to pleasure straight guys with minimal psychic investment is an urge I deplore in myself and that I learnt to face down. My thinking was that, at that time, I found it easier not to be in a relationship; indeed, I thought 'relationships' a stiflingly heteronormative model. (In those days, I would have seemed 'camp' to the point of being intergender; now I'd identify as GQ, having come late to the party). Having 'relationships' with lovers, who--themselves--wove their way in and out of complicated primary relationships, was my way of stopping desiring these closeted straights. The roleplay would have been another way to go, perhaps.

**
One reason for saying 'why not both?' to IMDONE could have been Dan's recognition that she does not form relationships with men very readily, and finds it hard to imagine being with other than these two. It could seem 'wrong' to her--nor necessarily morally wrong, but unlikely, improper, psychologically too much of a stretch.

All the same, I think 'get out there!' better advice.

Steeeeeverino @66: I'm sorry about your situation. But while you may be right about people of either gender not getting much sympathy for "leaving because she's not getting it regularly," IMDONE isn't getting it AT ALL. I think there's a common attitude that one should put up with not getting as much sex as one might like, as every couple will have some level of mismatch. But someone who has completely shut down what most people agree is one important aspect of marriage? A different ball game.

I also disagree that it's too late for you! The kids won't be kids forever. Once breaking up the family isn't such an issue, you can perhaps ask your wife for an open relationship. She may be just as happy as you to see an end to the fights over sex because she's no longer expected to have sex with you, you'll just get it elsewhere. I know, most people aren't so rational; but if this does blow up your marriage, it won't affect your kids. Good luck to you.

@67 There's really nothing wrong with the desire to engage in sex without wanting to them immediately get married, and I think it's healthy to be able to convert a chronic fear or threat (in this case, homophobia) into a kink which produces pleasure, that's certainly better than just pain. I don't blame submissives who have or at one time had these things as elements of their fantasy lives.

The problem is that the act itself provides a reward, a very strong incentive, to continue the conscious behaviors which preceded and produced it. Men who haven't yet come out have not indicated they're mature enough to handle getting or giving a blowjob, and the results post-climax are usually either a severe backlash against the person who gave the blowjob, or a severe backlash against whatever voice might have said "hey, maybe I'm bi." For this reason, I never let the guys who want help with coming out to be aroused when they admit their same-sex desires, that ruins the whole endeavor the second they finish. Sure, their libido needs to be in the right place, but it must translate into their normal life or else it'll always produce cognitive dissonance and pain.

I don't think you deserve to feel guilt over this, that's not really on you, especially since you corrected it. I'm very pleased you found something healthier in the long term, that's great to hear!

IMDONE, please decide whether to leave the marriage before exploring hooking up with the ex. You will be happier. Psst, the answer is yes, leave the marriage. Are you okay with this for fifty more years?

Dan, does the Poly High Council pay you to suggest open relationships? Because would you enjoy wrangling an open relationship with this ace communicator? Uh, that's ace, not asexual. Sounds to me like a complete drag and a dead loss over ending it.

And yes people will judge you. Picture sitting in your new free life, being judged from afar. Doesn't it feel great? Worth every bless-your-heart.

And yes it's selfish, if that means not prioritizing someone else above yourself. It's allowed. This is your one life. You're not even breaking any rules, with a straightforward divorce.

Hell, I grant you special dispensation to cheat with the ex, if cheating is the only way you're going to blow all this up, like it seems to be for many people. Just don't latch onto the ex too long.

@69 Lionface: Congrats yet again for scoring this week's Lucky @69! May good fortune shower you with abundance beyond your wildest dreams!

@69. Lionface. Curiously, I was never at the stage of 'not yet having come out'--in that, even as a youth, it was assumed that I was gay, before I had any sexual experience or sexual relationships. Being able to pass as straight is a privilege some guys, usually tops, have that I can only imagine.

What I found easy to do--my internalized form of homophobia--was think that the queerness was only one aspect of me, and not one essential to my social persona. That is, I could be a scholar, or professional, without what I liked sexually impinging. But this enforced its own privations. It took years--well into my 30s--before I would feel my personality was rounded: before someone I met casually, if they thought about it, would get a fairly accurate sense of who I was from how I projected myself.

I'd still have a psychological aversion to marriage among gay men in an old-school way.

I guess a lot of us ordinarily commenting (myself included) are getting our food & booze supplies ready for July 4th. Red, red wiiiiiiiine!........stay close to meeeeeeeeeeeeeee.....

M?? Harriet - That sounds dreadful - if you were "punished for it" half as severely as I was (I "didn't walk right", among other things), it was far more than you could have "deserved" - but to be mis-read into the bargain...

What's your aversion? Mine is that we could have done better. The marriagistas took what comes across as the Queer Eye approach - if you're not invited to the straight party, turn the seventh cheek, kill them with kindness and show them how much better we can make their parties and lives. LMB. The obvious answer is to let them naturally get into a state of desperation to attend our parties.

Ms Grizelda - I've been contemplating how Wimbledon probably got Serena Williams' seeding just about right at #25, but finding the tone of the USTA's announcement that "it isn't going to punish players for taking maternity leave" rather off. Not that I'm against seeding players returning from off the tour; I could devise a number of schemes for it that might be an improvement over the current "protected ranking" system that only deals with entry into tournaments. This sounds as if it's going to be selective application, and treats an individual sport too much like ordinary employment. My mind immediately goes back to when the Supreme Court forced the PGA to let Casey Martin use a cart.

@72 Many thanks! May your cup runneth over with the bodily fluid(s) of your choice.

@73 Certainly I have always been privileged by my ability to totally pass as straight, and I am a top. Worse yet is that my distinct taste for more feminine males--by which I mean that most twinks qualify as too masculine for me--puts me in league more with closeted men, whom I detest. Freud called this the narcissism of small difference, I call it psychological foreshortening, we always hate the loud neighbors across the street rather than the loud neighbors down the road.

In large part my disgust is in response to seeing their attempts to justify their behavior as not only a gross impingement upon what rightfully belongs to out gay and bi men (the ability to meaningfully get together with another male), but an outright attempt to annex that whole psychosexual terrain in the name of being closeted. This sounds absurd but I suspect we both know how much more absurd it gets.

Since I regretfully cannot burn down every closet, my option is to make the space outside the closet, and the space that directly opposes the closet, so successful, so absolutely toe-curlingly knee-knockingly orgasmic for submissive men that only the most truly self-loathing would dare stay inside. So far it seems to be working.