I'd say PISS has a fetish, not a kink, because he isn't aroused without piss. Maybe I need to adjust my use of "fetish" versus "kink".

Thank god for Dan! I read this shit and just couldn't do it.

This was bound to happen. We never get to keep nice things.

Thanks, everyone! I loved reading these stories.

Let me get this straight, BETTER. You wrote to Dan for NO other reason than that something is true for you that is never true for people who DO have a good reason to write to Dan?

These letters were nice. But Dan is right.

@5 nocutename: Ditto. I'm so happy for all these couples who wrote in and shared their positive marital stories. I wish I had more to add.

Thanks for posting these letters Dan. Agree, they're not an argument in favour of getting married as a way to solve sex problems. But they were nice to read.

Just as people might have got the impression from your mail bag that sex never improves after marriage, a high proportion of the commentariat seem to think non-monogamy is always a bad idea because you only print letters from polys with problems. How about a batch of letters from happy polys to disabuse the haters of that notion?

Ms Fan - I would want to hear the letters from people who did poly as a price of admission or to cater to an ultimatum, made it work and had a happy relationship, then went back in a future relationship to monogamy and were even happier. Mr Savage's tendency is to push the people for whom he uses that inelegant acronym who started out under duress but became Shiny Happy Polys, presumably in perpetuity.

For the record, I entirely believed you in some other thread in which you said you weren't claiming that poly is superiour.

Ms Cute -

Mr Savage occasionally makes sincere-appearing statements that he doesn't believe monogamy to be inferiour to non-monogamy, but more often makes me recall Miss Brodie telling her girls about to enter the Senior School that there is nothing wrong with choosing a Modern education. "Modern and Classical; they are equal," is said in such a way as to give her set (of whom only the athletic Eunice stood out to be a Modern, though Mary wasn't up to the Classical standard) and others she'd taught no doubt as to her True Opinion.

Did you ever see any of the television series? I have a distinct memory of very briefly catching the tail end of one episode on A&E about thirty years ago. Miss Brodie was telling her set, "Mary MacGregor has become a woman," or it might not even have registered which series it was. I don't think Ms McEwan's Miss Brodie physically resembled Dame Maggie's much, although, weirdly, her Lucia (in Mapp and Lucia, opposite Ms Scales) strongly did resemble the Miss Brodie of the film. Alas, YouTube pulled the episodes, or I'd recommend them; that series covered the last three of the six books.

@6 - No, I wrote in because he said he hadn't seen letters where the sex got better. We beat the odds. I know we beat the odds. I even put in some of the reasons for us to have failed at marriage. But we didn't. It can happen. It's a million to one chance, but it just might work. :)

Some other reasons I, and probably others, wrote in:
- If all you get are letters that are how people fucked up their lives, that can get really depressing.
- He pretty much asked for the letters. If someone says, "I never get letters with X," you can bet your last dollar they'll get at least 20 letters with X. It's almost a challenge to his readers.
- I wanted to brag on my wife. She's GGG and deserves a little recognition, even if it is semi-anonymous.

And yes, I am aware that Dan writes an advice column. People who write in for advice are generally people who are not happy, who have something wrong with a part of their lives.

Venn @10: Thank you! I know some people may get that impression because I often find myself in the position of defending the, um, can we call it institution? of polyamory from commenters who say it can't work. Your letter request sounds quite specific! Could I expand the suggestion to letters from people who have at various points in their lives been happily monogamous and just as happily non-monogamous? Your scenario of poly under duress, happier monogamous, still reveals a bias. I know a number of happy not-under-duress-at-all poly folks who became monogamous by attrition, and enjoy retaining the option to see other people in theory even if they never use it in practice.

@11. BobR. Your letter was enlightening and welcome. Thank you!

@11 BobR
Fair enough; hey I'm happy for you (and the other LWs)! I was trying to be funny @6, but on re-reading your @BETTER I really wasn't/shouldn'tve.

@WIFE "he needed that emotional attachment to feel safe and secure enough to open up and relax and enjoy himself"
@PPP "practice"

Good and interesting (simple) reasons!

@CHOMP
@ERECT
Congrats, I'm so happy for you all, rock on!

Mr. Ven, I've never seen the tv series.

Ank @ 2 - Piss has a fetish which also happens to be widely considered a kink. No need for adjustments.

I meant PISS

BiDanFan @13 - I see myself as someone who has been "happily monogamous and just as happily non-monogamous." Plus, I first tried non-monogamy to please my husband, before learning it made me happy too.

Mr. Venn @10 - It wasn't either a "price of admission or to cater to an ultimatum," but it definitely wasn't my idea or my preference, when we opened up.

Next question: We had such great sex together right from the start that we got married certain that all the other stuff like compatibility as far as things like where we'd live, how we'd spend money, who would make money, who would clean the house, whether we'd have children, how we'd raise children, to what extent our parents would be in our lives, we figured we figure that stuff out later. What are the chances? Did this work for anyone, or could it be predicted from the start this would be a fail?

@20: Fichu, do you think most couples sit down with a checklist of issues like that to discuss before deciding to become serious?

I think most people (in non-arranged marriages) get together because of initial attraction (whether they act on it by having sex or not), and then as they start spending time together as a couple, some of those items on your list naturally crop up. It's true that some probably warrant a discussion, but unless a couple gets married within a few weeks or months of meeting, many of those items have reared their heads.

I know people whose marriages ended because everything but sex was fine, and I know people whose marriages ended because all they had in common was sex--I'd say it's about even. And I'd wager that just as many marriages survive where they have nothing in common but good sex or where everything's good and the couple is compatible in every way except sex.

And a lot of other marriages or relationships fail for different reasons altogether.

I’d like to join the kumbaya campfire by offering a link to a video one shouldn’t watch on a company computer during lunch break.
The subject of how authentic, consensual, and enjoyable a gangbang could be in real life as well as in porn appeared in some recent threads. The following video link features an elaborate bukkake, some 15 men or so ejaculates on a woman’s face in a Danish sex club as she is held and caressed by a man who seems to be her lover and possibly dom, who also goes down on her nicely before the crowd arrives, and both seem to enjoy all actions involved. (This is my assumption based on voice tone and body language. I don’t speak Danish.)

The camera work is of professional grade, yet could be offered by the venue or maybe hired by the couple. The poor lighting conditions though suggest that this video was not shot for strictly commercial reasons.
Danish no pornography rules made the news back in the days, and it is my guess that with proper prior announcements in the venue and beyond one can find plenty of willing willies.

https://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph596055e46b9ad

I wish Denmark had advanced. England and Columbia should be both tossed away for displaying such a dispirited game, while Japan allowed back in.
B vs. B on Friday is likely to prove as the final wannabe. My guess is that the winner of that game is going to win the world cup. As a tribute to some Spurs players as well as our very own Ricardo, I’m a Belgiumite!

Ms Fan - Of course it could run the other way just as well; I was only thinking of things that run counter to Mr Savage's narrative. Mr Savage invites the inference that the flow generally goes one way only; that people who take to it become, as I said, Shiny Happy Polys and never go back. Your second version would work just as well, and it would be nice to see the testimony from anyone who's proved that it is possible to adapt to/for a partner's preference for X and get it to work without becoming and staying X oneself. It might even help people who are on the fence about accommodating a partner's iffy-seeming kink.

Mx Wanna - Well, Belgium is as close to Holland as this WC had; at least it's not quite so bad as if it were the Winter Olympics without Dutch speed skaters.

Venn @23: Gotcha, your idea of the theme being Prove Dan Wrong. Well, one of the now-monogamous couples I know met when she was married to her ex-husband and they were poly. The marriage ended, the secondary relationship became primary, and to my knowledge neither of them has pursued anyone else in the ensuing seven or so years. Was she poly at Ex-Husband's insistence? I haven't asked. I also don't recall "once you go poly, you'll never go back" being part of Dan's sales pitch, though I may have missed it. It's more the "open your relationship, solve your problem" advice that seems overprescribed, even to me.

As Dan points out, people don't write in to advice columnists unless they actually need advice -- unless, as in this case, they are invited to do so. But it was refreshing to read some positive stories of people who figured out how to make things better for themselves.

So I wouldn't mind seeing more of these sorts of things sprinkled in every so often. But also, what I really love is when LW's write back to explain how things changed. I don't mind the occasional re-run letter (even though I've been here long enough to almost always remember it the first time around), but what I'd really love is if Dan and/or an intern tried to reach out to the original LW to include a follow-up comment.

Venn- Thanks for that Holland reference. Assuming we go all the way back to 1974 I would like to point out that Belgium had a tremendous come back against Japan, nothing like Holland ever achieved in that level.
That said, the Dutch winning goal after a 0:1 deficit against Italy four years later produced one of the most remarkable world cup goals ever:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VF-UNcnfqG0

Unfortunately the only Dutch skaters I know appear on the stickers of some locally sold goat-milk Gouda.

A feel good for them thread.
When it all gets too much I retreat into books. Just scored a great book about The Beats, or some of them, living in Paris.
Is the soccer over yet?

@11 BobR: Good for you and your equally GGG wife for beating the odds, and thanks for joining in with us.

Mx Wanna - I've only played once, scored two goals, saw my friend score three for the other team, and that was it. (I never liked team sports much.) But I do have a fondness for the Ajax Arena, where they held our closing ceremonies twenty years ago.

Meanwhile, the new mantra of the WTA not to "punish" women for being mommies seems in line to produce dubious policy. Weirdly, it may still be an improvement over the current policy of only guaranteeing entry to tournaments for a certain period but not seeding players. Remember Maria Sharapova's drawing Simona Halep last year in the first round of the US Open (though Ms S had been banned for using meldonium). But the way it's being talked about as if it were just an ordinary case of a working woman returning to her job just doesn't apply. This isn't, say, the equivalent of Ms Cute's taking a sabbatical from which she would return at the same level and presumably with the same capacity. Someone who leaves the tour for a year ranked, say, #8 at time of departure, may deserve a seed when she returns, but not #8 right away at first, and it sounds as if that's the direction they could be heading.

Venn- what was that ceremony 20 years ago supposed to close? From what I know bridge tournaments usually take place in smaller venues.
Interestingly #8 was my number of choice when I was still running on the sandy “grass” while kicking and getting kicked.
Numbers didn’t matter much as we often rotated positions, yet once on the pitch I was always #8.

Kevin @26: Yes! I too would like more follow ups. Did they take Dan's advice? Did they solve their problem or move on?

@curious2 - what, me not get the humor of something on the internet? That's unpossible. No worries. :)

@21 is right. People can be and are happy in any number of situations. It just depends on the people and to say one is better than the other is just wrong, and no kind of love is better than others.

Mx Wanna - Ajax Arena hosted the closing ceremonies for Gay Games Amsterdam.

Now the Williams sisters have both been sniping at Wimbledon over the scheduling on Centre and Court One, which could only be fixed realistically if the club were to start play at 11:00 a.m. on the top courts (cue Mr Carvey's impersonation of Pres Bush pere saying, "Not Gonna Happen"?). They start at 1:00 p.m. and cannot rely on going on much past 9:00 - not enough time to schedule four matches. They've tried doing so, generally on the second Monday (typically called the greatest day in tennis, when, after no play on the middle Sunday, the entire fourth round in both singles draws is contested in one day), and I can recall two years running when Jennifer Capriati, trying to beat the clock, lost the second set of the last match and pushed the whole women's draw back a day. The club isn't averse to scheduling two women's singles and one men's (Tuesday they had the traditional start for the ladies' defender [Assembled Company: mark that as about the only time I voluntarily use the L word], followed by both the champions from France), but that increases the risk of a thin schedule if matches go quickly, which is more probable during the first week. There are usually one or two late matches held over, waiting for a good court to finish early, but naturally those will be women's matches as better able to fill a hole, so that it often evens out to two of each.

I do wish I could get coverage with British commentary, and I wonder how Ms Navratilova's complaint about her relative pay from the BBC compared to Mr McEnroe's is panning out.

BobR @11: "It's a million to one chance, but it just might work."

I see what you did there. :) [For anyone who did not, go read Terry Pratchett.] I'm glad things are working out well for you.

Anecdotes are data. Just not enough data.

NoCute@21 ~ “...do you think most couples sit down with a checklist of issues like that to discuss before deciding to become serious?...”
Ex-wife & I did the premarital counseling before getting hitched, & went through a lot of those questions...I think it was great & Should be mandatory for anyone considering marriage. I didn’t prevent the divorce, but we went in with a lot considered ahead of time.

@37 Omnipotent Comment God, DonnyKlicious: Your idea of a prenup agreement was excellent, and I fully agree on such a thing being mandatory. Just imagine if abusive marriages and the divorce rate in the U.S. suddenly went poof. I wish I had had the sense to have done like you did, even if you still got divorced, too. I wish I'd avoided making the marriage mistake. At least my ex and I didn't make the child mistake as well. Jeezus, I keep thinking about OOOOPS's situation from a good bunch of SLs back.

@38: Was...? Sorry, Donny, I meant it IS an excellent idea.

It's a long, long way to sixty-niiiiiiine.........

@37: I'm not disagreeing that discussing those issues in advance of marriage is a good idea; I'm just saying I don't think many couples do that, especially all of the issues that Fichu listed and/or on their own, without mandated pre-marital counseling.

@41 Really? Is this a generational thing? Regional? All my friends are turning 30 this year or next, must of us are never-married/no-kids/highly educated, and NOT discussing these issues seems cray cray to me.

@42: Maybe go back and look at Fichu's posting @20 and my reply @21. She made it sound like if people don't sit down with a clipboard and check off the different items "discussed and agreed-upon," when they first get together, marriages are doomed to failure. I said that I thought that most couples initially get together based on mutual attraction and, assuming they don't marry within the first 2 months of knowing each other, many of those issues come up rather organically before couples marry.

@42 DC270: I agree, and believe my nieces and nephews, all millennials between the ages of soon turning 26 to 34, would agree with you, too. None of them is married, and only one--my oldest nephew, has a son. National statistics are showing that fewer people are marrying and having kids these days.

@42, its hard to discuss how you'd behave as parents if say your baby had a physical disability, or how each of the parents do their parenting, once a child is born. Words are easy when there's no pressure. Kindness can be difficult when you're exhausted as.

So how do you talk @42 thru a situation where a young couple decide they don't want children then much later on, when she is no longer able to have babies, her husband decides he wants now to be a dad. So he leaves and marries a much younger woman to achieve his wishes. Talk only takes one so far and life does the rest.

It doesn't matter how much you discuss what you both want in the future (within reason) because people change and what they want changes. My brother's marriage ended because after 15 years of being on the same page about not ever wanting to have children, his wife suddenly felt a deep need to have children which he just didn't share. She was 38 by then and didn't end up having children (she's 51 now) and went through a pretty long period of feeling like she was grieving and slowly acknowledging that it wasn't going to happen (she did try).
Me and my husband started dating and seemed to stumble into getting engaged then married then having children without ever talking much about any of it! Not sure how that happened but it's been great.

Things DO change, and life has a way of screwing up your best laid plans, no doubt. But talking is the place to start, and periodically checking in and saying, "We haven't talked for a while, how are things going? Anything you're concerned about?" is always a good idea. People hold back a lot, and little annoyances fester and get more annoying than they would be if they would have been dealt with early on. You have to consciously make the effort to stay in touch and not take stuff for granted. I don't think I'm making some ground-breaking statement here, you'd think the truth would be self-evident. but a quick perusal of Savage Love letters belies that assumption. People always think it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission, but how often do you read a letter and think, "Well...maybe if you had just TALKED it over first, 'Hey, I'm thinking of fucking my uncle, the thrice-convicted arsonist...any thoughts on how that might affect our relationship?'"

@48 Omnipotent Comment God DonnyKlicious: You're right. One of the biggest mistakes my ex and I made was when we stopped talking. But then his mask was already off and his unhinged, drunken, unkempt Jack Torrance side was by then showing its fangs, pushing for us to have kids. Yelling, threatening, bullying, being sexually forceful. I had nothing left but survival. How I managed to remain childless during my toxic marriage still amazes me. How does one talk sense to an abusive, crazy person hellbent on remaining in control?

Fichu @20 et al: Even if one does not physically sit down with a checklist, those are the issues that tend to assert themselves and need resolving at some point between the NRE phase and the wedding. This is why I think people should wait multiple years before getting married. You figure out as you go along who cleans the house and who doesn't; you have a conversation about kids, particularly if you're heterosexual and therefore at risk of accidental pregnancy; you see how well you relate to their parents and vice versa, etc. So yeah. You DO figure you'll figure all that stuff out "later," but "later" should mean before marriage, not after. I'm sure those folks foolish enough to rush into marriage, some uncovered fundamental incompatibilities (just as some of us pre-married couples did) and some lucked into a long happy relationship (ditto). In other words, I agree with NoCute @43.

No Lucky @69 takers this week? Okay. I'll try back on Tuesday for Dan the Man's next SL installment. Sorry, Dan and everyone about my not having much more to add.
XOXO, positrons, and VW beeps,
griz

Donny @48, neurotic people don’t learn how to check in with each other. Really check in like what you’re talking about. Their models of intimacy from childhood creates clusterfucks for them, that’s why at a certain point of clarity, when they see the damage they live in, they write into Dan.

@42, DC270, what’s with the tone of your comment.
“ Is this generational. Or regional. “ Nocute is a professional woman who has raised two children. Instead of doing some better than routine, maybe asking for guidance from older women might be more beneficial.
It’s great many young women are getting their careers and financial security together and talking about plans. If you want babies, do it with your friends. It’s a journey and a half, and company makes it easier. When you have contractions, groan into them, don’t yell, you lose your energy. And don’t leave it too late for babies, they got you running round like a rabbit, so best you do it when you’ve still got some energy.
If you’re not having babies, it does seem to be happening as Grizelda above says. And it’s understsndable. Kids are expensive little fuckers.

understandable.