I just love how Christians feel they can say any hateful, assholic thing they want and the "I'm praying for you" makes it okay.
Some people say "God hates fags"... I feel like God really hates hypocrites. Enjoy hell, asshole.

What a loving, Xtian act it is to suggest that someone's mother was taken from this world early because of their offspring's romantic leanings. If that's Jesus' love, then I'll happily go without, thx all the same.

VIBE, in /addition/ to taking Dan's advice you could educate the GF about the efficacy of (assuming you've done it) proper sextoy cleaning. I wish Dan had given a link to a past sextoy cleaning instructions column.

Dan, how does SAW watching those videos make her in a bad person to /any/ degree? Doing so hurt no one. Remember your position on "secret perving"?

Dan, thank you for making fun of that CESS(pool); laughing at him made me feel infinitely better than the mountainous anger at him I was feeling.

My advice to VIBE is to shop with his girlfriend for a vibrator. She probably has preferences.

In my experience, lingerie, vibrators & dildos are personal and many people don't want to use someone else's, no matter how well you washed it. I do think that if you present your strap-on dildo as your appendage (rather than as a sex toy), most people will treat it like a bio-cock and not ask who else it has touched.

LW4 is clearly a CESSPOOL.

@1 portland scribe and @2 Sanguisuga: Agreed.
@3 Curious2: I didn't catch your comment in time. Congrats for beating me to it!

Re: VIBE - If someone pulled out an obviously used sextoy and tried to use it on me, my reaction wouldn't be 'how very dare', it would be more like, 'Ew. I don't know where that's been.' In regards to a bio-cock, well, that would be wrapped up. So maybe the toy should be too.

Couldn't SIS just, you know, hate-dom the guy? That's a thing, isn't it?

BGB~ I’m seconding Dan’s advice to be clear on your profile. People read stuff into you that THEY want to hear, so don’t give them any opportunity to imagine your butt wriggling around on their nose.

VIBE~ How old are you? Haven’t you discovered that (most) females can be finicky about what they stick up their cooch? Truth be told, if they had their way, men would come with interchangeable dicks so they wouldn’t have to fuck one that’s been wedged into any other woman’s sweaty nethers. Dan’s “keep the box” white lie is a good work-around, and “shop together” is an even better one. I love going to the toy store with the GF and picking out something new to play with.

SAW~ I’m with curious@2... secret perving harms no one as long as it STAYS secret. And, in this digital Internet age, anyone who makes ANY kind of video, or photo, or written post, or etc, etc has to know that they’re running a risk of it getting into the wrong hands. In fact, Murphy’s Law practically guarantees it. File it away in the ol’ spank bank and say no more.

CESS~ nothing I can say will alert you to the indisputable fact that YOU are the asshole, so I won’t waste my electronic time.

SIS~ Don’t associate with assholes even if they can wash your socks.

WBGGG~ Here’s a thought... talk about stuff. You’ll be amazed at how much more efficient it is than guessing.

DUM~ Really? EVERY time you have to ask the question, “Am I being a dumb shit?” He answer is “undoubtably”.

@#1 - Very well said.

@CESS - You'd better hope Jesus saves hypocrites too because you're not a real Christian, just a judgemental jerk who mistakenly believes he's qualified to speak for God.

My husband and I do not share hairbrushes, toothbrushes, razors, etc despite pretty regularly sharing all sorts of bodily fluids. During sex might be an OK time to introduce sex toys, but it's not an ok time to argue with someone who shows reluctance to use them. And if someone is psychologically creeped out by the thought of someone else having used the same sex toy previously, it's pretty stupid to remind that person that someone else has also used the same dick. Not everyone wants to think of that during sex.

If a guy pulled a sex toy out of drawer during sex, I probably would not use it either if I did not see it come out of the box. If I knew the guy really well, that might be different, but otherwise, no. If it's something very personal like a vibrator or a butt plug, I'd probably just prefer my own and get no pleasure for one that is not specifically what I like. But regardless of that, I'd want to guarantee the thing is safely washed, and unless I knew the guy super well, I would not just trust that he did wash it well. If he argued with me about it with "but my dick has been used by others too" logic then this would make me feel validated that my judgement of caution was correct.

I did know face sitting was such a popular thing as to have a recurrent type even when you aren't looking for it.

And sometimes we all realize we are cliched in some ways. This self awareness doesn't necessarily translate into action because if you are a cliche, then you are a cliche. Find some motivating reason to DTMFA if you don't want to be the other woman, or else consider what it is that you are getting out of remaining the "other woman" and see how else you can get that. Even if he does dump his wife, what are the chances that he will then immediately jump right into a relationship with you? If he does, what are the chances that it will be what you have projected it will be? And finally, if it is, what are the chances that he won't continue to cheat and then you'll be the wife while someone else is the other woman? These are all cliches.

Regarding Dan's advice to Sick and Wrong-

He left out something really important. The LW watched and wanked, fine. That makes her not a perfect person. But if she wants to remain only a little bad when the opportunity falls into her lap rather than shitty and harmful, she will be sure to do the following: A) make sure to lie about it if the topic ever comes up around her cousin or the family like this: "I saw that the asshole ex sent this video and immediately thought - yikes I don't want to see that- and I deleted it. B) don't brag about watching it- keep it to herself even with friends. C) never ever let any of those hot sexy feels you had show when interacting with him in the future.

Cousin's mortification will come from the fact that his ex even did this shit thing but also from the violating thought of others watching and waking. What you can do to be a good (but still not perfect) person is to validate his feelings that the ex was indeed an asshole who did a shit thing and ease the sense of violation of privacy by reassuring him that you didn't see it.

I love that the Jesus freaks spend so much time with the Bible and yet can't figure out to read the book. If they are going to be literal with their readings then they have to accept all the things that aren't in the Bible that people could do with one another. And if they aren't going to read it literally and understand that the Bible was written in context and the various passages about homosexuality are priestly codes. But the writer is an idiot.

I find it interesting that a guy who understands the value of a vibrator to enhance his partner's pleasure but is annoyed that the partner wouldn't want to use a used vibrator. I mean she could wash off a latex condom following the same instructions offered to clean a vibrator. Does he want to re-use the used condom?

Christianity is the biggest, oldest, queeniest self-loathing closet case there is.

CESS, what a really cruel thing to write to Dan, and just before Xmas when thoughts go to those who have died and won’t be at Xmas dinner.

I see a vast ethical gulf difference between discrete sex play when those near by or on the phone are entirely clueless, and masturbating to videos that you know to have been distributed without consent. SAW has received multiple erotic thrills from her cousin's violation. A violation of which he is well aware. Whereas the person on phone not only has not done anything sexual, but is entirely unaware of any sexual activity, and will remain so.

Many littles get bad reactions from partners when they reveal their DD/lg kink, so I am not surprised that she might be oblique in expressing her interest in this dynamic. The problem that I see is that WBGGG is not interested in this dynamic after learning something about it, and unlike agreeing to spank your partner regularly, DD/lg can be a big commitment, so you need to be more than GGG. If his girlfriend needs this kink satisfied to be happy then they are not going to be a good fit long term. He should broach this topic directly, and sooner rather than later.

BGB- post a picture of yourself, face covered, wearing something that indicates your submissiveness like your glorious ass picking under a maid uniform, or a hand/device of some sort slapping it.

SIS
Assuming you’re a woman, it is possible that so-called subs respond to your ad with the hope of getting more than what the cleaning contract may call for.
Be assertive, yet also show your playful, creative sides. Conduct your initial screenings as an ordinary yet twisted hiring process. Applicants must present a resume at the initial interview, always held in a public place, they have to audition and prove their cleaning skills, references upon request.

Some subs love mind games and are attuned to your cues as well as giving you their own. This is a mutual process, subs look for a reason to serve you and you do have to earn their respect and willingness to submit.

Oh CESS, Religion is often an excuse. In your case one can claim, “I’m not an asshole or anything, this is only what God wants.”

@18 Welcome back from your vacation, CMD!

SAW: so not only did you wank to revenge porn, you wanked to porn of your cousin? Someone you're related to? What is this, Kentucky? I mean, I get that it's not like a sibling, but still... ew.

I just want to say that face sitting, or face being-sat, is not necessarily an act of submission. One need not be sub to want to be smothered in pussy, one just needs to be into pussy. It's unfathomable to me that anyone -- dom, sub, vanilla -- wouldn't be into receiving oral sex. I know some aren't, but if BGB does like receiving oral in other contexts, could she accept an occasional face-sitting session as the price of admission for an otherwise dominant (or GGG in the ways -she- likes) lover? If not, then yeah. No matter how one words one's profile, lots of men don't bother to read them anyway; deleting scads of irrelevant messages is part and parcel of online dating while female. BCB could try Bumble, where only women are allowed to send initial messages. Otherwise, sadly, there's not much she can do about this problem, aside from reassure herself that all women-into-men, regardless of size, are in the same boat.

WBGGG, tenderly tucking your girlfriend into bed sounds sweet even if it doesn't get you wet. Maybe it doesn't get her wet either, she just wants to feel cared for and protected. Why not do this for her? It's possible for two partners to enjoy the same acts for different reasons. Of all the kinks people write in asking to have indulged, this seems like the littlest (sorry) ask I've heard of!

DUM, you understand men just fine, and you're beginning to understand denial. If you're enjoying the sex, don't DTMFA, just accept that this is the extent of your relationship, regardless of the words that come out of his mouth. And if you want a more committed relationship, start auditioning replacements -- or even primaries who would let you keep this affair going, if that's what you want. This probably WILL blow up in your face someday, however, so I would go for the phase-out strategy rather than the pretend-poly one. Good luck.

Oh @CESS, why did you pick a name which is so relentlessly on the nose? It's too easy.

Also, @VIBE... Seriously?

Okay, you wash your dick pretty regularly, right? (I had damn well better get a yes on that one.) Your lady friend therefore has more reason to trust that you have been, as it were, properly sterilized than a hunk of plastic. Also, it is a part of your body. A vibrator is not. If your lady friend agreed to have PIV sex with you, she was agreeing to your dick. Just because she agreed to one thing doesn't mean she's agreed to whatever you want to do to her, right? You have to respect that. Or you should, if you would like further access to her vagina. Or any vagina.

And if I REALLY have to, I can bring up the fact that your body is constantly making new cells and sloughing the old ones off, so odds are you're using different dick-skin on this new young lady as well. And the fact that as a sexually active person I hope you're regularly getting tested for STIs, which the vibrator has not. Odds are extreeeemely slim that anything on the vibrator would be communicable, yes, but it's a legitimate squick for someone to have.

Seriously. "My dick has been in other people too so you have to let me put this other thing in you because I want to" is NOT a good look. Maybe it didn't come off this way in person, maybe it was only the impression I got from the letter. But it looks like that's the impression a lot of readers got. It's probable that you only wanted to enhance your partner's pleasure, since usually the kind of fellow who busts out a vibrator during sex isn't totally focused on his own. But you really might want to look at your phrasing, as well as your assumptions.

Because @22: LWs don't always pick their own signoffs.

Re the vibrator: who puts an unknown unwrapped dildo inside themselves? Asking for an allergic reaction there, at minimum. (I always used a condom on mine, even personal-only toys, because they are easier to clean that way and some of them are made from terrible plastics... even the best can develop small imperfections that can be hard to clean.) so yes, dude with used vibrator was expecting too much.
Re attracting subs, this is typical because (so I’ve been told) there are so many “submissive” men and so many seem to do the junk mail approach to messaging... i.e. message 100s and maybe one will reply. But this emphasis on face sitting seems unusual... I have literally never encountered the term or the practice personally so the fact that so many bring it up make me wonder if something in her profile references it. Might be just her fabulous ass but maybe it’s something about oral? Maybe she could write that she doesn’t like getting oral, only giving. (I found it either boring or annoying...in a submissive posture would simply wait it out until something more interesting happened. )

I am pleased to see CESS being criticised from a Christian perspective @10.

In my book, SAW did something a little wrong, because she in all probability has a lifetime non-sexual relationship ahead of her with her cousin. What if she's impaired or jeopardised this by violating his privacy and jerking off over his sex-life? Probably, though, she hasn't. My experience is that when I need to have a practical or professional conversation with someone on a matter of some urgency, or even have regular but banal contact with them --and I've previously thought of that person in a sexualized way--the sexy thoughts drop away into the background. The LW should maybe seek to re-establish routine contact with her cousin immediately (rather than, say, dodging him), in the hope that they lapse back into their old way of relating.

How long was the list of friends? Her cousin will have accepted that some of the recipients saw him fucking; whether or not his cousin did may not be the point of greatest sensitivity for him. As EmmaLiz says, of course she should give the impression she didn't watch it.

Does SIS envision any bodily sexual contact with the mansplaining sub? I thought, 'no'... But if the kink is only the dominance and submission mind game, isn't the sub harshing it by, out-of-scene, gratingly explaining why he likes being abjected by doing the laundry? That doesn't sound satisfying.

If SIS is invested enough in the idea of a guy doing her domestic tasks to interview subs, then it would seem she cares enough to find the right guy.

@21. Bi. There are two reasons why BGB doesn't like being the face-sitter. The most important is that it makes her uncomfortably and unhappily aware of her own body-shape, about which she is at best ambivalent. The other (this is likely, not sure) is that the face-sittees are subby in other ways that don't get her off. She is entitled, more than entitled, to have this be a hard 'no'.

L1: I am reminded of the exhibition match between Ms Williams (S) and Ms Wozniacki during which Ms Woz, doubtless inspired by Mr Djokovic, at one point went out on court and impersonated Ms Wil, completing the effect with towels stuffed in back. The two of them have remained quite good friends ever since; full credit to Ms Williams. As for this letter and Mr Savage's advice, I might omit the 13th-19th words of his suggested revision, but have nothing against the directness of his suggestion. I could Red Knight and point out that this is not exactly consistent with the position that "masc4masc" is toxic.

L2: This may be one of Mr Savage's best answers of the year, as he succeeds in dunking on both LW and partner while leaving it open for interpretation which of the two should dump the other. This one gets unqualified high praise.

L3: I shall give this one an individual post all to itself. I commend Mizz Liz for her suggestions on how LW should go forward. M?? Harriet's added suggestion is also useful.

L4: While understandable, the response is inconsistent with monogamish. I deliberately avoid commenting about LW.

L5: It is highly tempting to predict that the sub LW5 rejected is exactly the sort of person for whom LW5 will fall badly, but the Reverse Carville-Matalin is one of the biggest cliches around.

L6: LW6 wastes a decent question. Rather a pity.

L7: What would LW tell her favourite sister to do?

Eww men can’t be trusted to change their sheets once a month. Have you seen their bathrooms. Hard pass on his sex toys!!!

My take on VIBE's letter was a little different. I didn't see it as a question of using someone else's vibrator on a new girlfriend. I saw it as a question of using someone else's logic. The thing VIBE is trying to set up is "My logic is better than your feelings so you have to do what I say." The girlfriend didn't write in, but if she did, I'd be telling her to shut down that line argument fast, and if VIBE doesn't come around, run.

Take this parody of the letter: My girlfriend says she loves the color blue. A lot of her shirts and dresses are blue. She has blue curtains in her apartment. (The walls are white.) When we go to an art gallery, there's no hiding that the paintings she admires most have a lot of blue in them. Further, she hates orange! I tried to give her an orange shirt, but she said she didn't like the color. I pointed out that orange is a good color and that lots of people like orange. Orange is the color of sunsets and she likes sunsets, so why won't she wear an orange shirt? She says it makes her sallow. Do you think she's being reasonable?

Harriet @28: Not sure how anyone can be "more than entitled," but I certainly agree that BGB or anyone else has the right to reject any suitor, even one who approaches offering an activity they DO like, but in a way that they don't. Hell, as much as I love oral, if anyone's initial message to me was "hey baby, sit on my face" I'd hit delete immediately. My only point was that "hey baby, sit on my face" does not equal "I am a submissive who would never dominate you the way you like." It equals "I'm a crude jerk," and I hope I never implied she should be obligated to date anyone who uses such an approach.

HBTB @28 "it makes her uncomfortably and unhappily aware of her own body-shape, about which she is at best ambivalent."

Ambivalent? That's not the impression I got. She says she has "a fabulous butt".

Being big myself, I see where BGB is coming from. Face-sitting really isn't so much about oral. These guys are seeking out fuller-figured women because they want to be * smothered * by their asses. It's a pretty specific fetish, and bigger gals are fetishised enough. That's clearly not how she wants to be objectified.

Sanguisuga @34: Thanks for that, one learns something new every day. I have new sympathy for BGB who is being subjected to more than the garden-variety objectification that all women suffer online. (Do certain commenters still think we're "lucky"?) I guess she really does need to put in bold all-caps at the top of her profile, "I AM NOT HERE TO FULFILL YOUR FACE-SITTING KINK." Or perhaps she could try to avoid photos that show off her bum. Sad the lengths we must go to, just to be treated like humans with preferences of our own, not unpaid sex workers! >:-(

I like face-sitting, but not because of any "smothering", it's just a very convenient position for rimming.

Re LW#2 - Dan was kidding about trying to pass off a used sex toy as a new one, right? No one should do that to their girlfriend (or date or whoever) unless they want her to become their EX-girlfriend pretty fast.

For DUM: It sounds like you understand men (or your man) just fine. You just don't want to believe the answers your heart is giving you. It's understandable but something you need to get over.

My ex did leave me for his girlfriend. Well, strike that. I technically left him because I couldn't stand the lies, the gaslighting, the torment he put me through. If I hadn't filed for divorced and kicked him out, he'd still be stringing his mistress along, telling her I'm awful but that he can't leave because of plausible and ever-changing reasons. He wouldn't have left on his own.

Now that he's with her, he's texting me about how awful she is, how much he regrets, how he hopes we can get back together someday. After all the work I did to forgive the past and let go of the anger so I could move forward, this is a gleeful little part of me that thinks "She's got him and I'm free. I win."

Guys like him? They're not the prize you think they are. They know scarcity adds value and that being around only occasionally means you're less likely to see who they really are.

For VIBE:
The head of my Hitachi is porous. The whole thing has nooks and crannies that are difficult to clean. It has never touched human flesh other than my clean fingers as I put a condom over it before playing with anyone, including myself. I wouldn't even want to use it on myself a second time if the first time wasn't wrapped up in a condom.

Anyone who objects to that has an irrational fear of germs and isn't sane enough to play with me.

For DUM: I came here to say what Mirea in 38 said but then had another thought. What do you want? You want your boyfriend to leave his wife for you. You know that's not going to happen. The next question is if you really want to dump him.

You know what you have now: Him for a short time each week and hot sex.
Consider what you'd have if you dumped him: No one. Back to the dating bored. No hot sex. The chance that you'd find the relationship you want. The chance that you won't.

What if you did this: Cut back the time to see Mr. Exciting to a scheduled hot time each week. The rest of the time, date. If whether or not you're involved with someone comes up, tell the guys you date that you are dating other people. Do this until you meet someone you want to be exclusive with. THEN dump the other guy.

When you date without having someone sex with someone, I swear men can smell desperation. They run. When you date having recently had some hot sex, you come across as (nominally more) confident, satisfied, and worthy of great things. You're far more likely to get a more excellent relationship that way. And if you don't, you won't be (as) lonely in the mean time.

I think the ansewr to e

I think the answer to the last one (DUM) is far simpler: if he's dishonest with his spouse, he's probably dishonest whenever he stands to lose something or there might be possible confrontation.

People are consistent that way--some tend to be more honest than others. You won't be spared the same treatment in the future, and you're worth more than that.

I'm a bi guy... once more straight, now more gay.

I have to say that I didn't really realize straight guys kept a vibrator laying around for their girlfriends, I never did and I don't think my friends did either.

Being gay now, I've never been presented with / used / abused a sex toy that wasn't covered in a condom. I thought that was the common and agreed-on practice. I mean, you can't really sterilize the things and god knows what might grow in / on one. This includes using ones on the owner.

On another topic... married boyfriends.

He's not your boyfriend, he's another woman's husband. Boyfriends of three years introduce you to their friends and family and have you over for the holidays.

If you like him and enjoy the sex... and don't want anything long term... well... it's your choice.

Just don't think this is going anywhere else. It isn't. And sister, you aren't getting any younger.

Maybe the women I have dated have been of the "non-squicky" variety as none have objected to the properly cleaned vibrators in my drawer, in fact all were happy to have the option available. (Actually, I actively sought non-squicky, as it fit much better wirth my personality. I once had a GF who just had to iron her shorts before we went for a bike ride. She didn't last long.) Sex toys are EXPENSIVE (or at least the good ones are) $75-$145... making it impractical to buy new ones for every one-night stand. But once the relationship extended, I was happy to shop for "our" new toys. Moral of the story: Low-maintenance dates are the best. But if you have a partner who objects, put that thing back in the drawer and either accept it as a price of admission or don't.

I have one sex toy, a small buttplug made of surgical steel, only for use on myself. That thing can be cleaned perfectly, why on earth should I put a condom on it? I might as well put condoms on my spoons and forks.

That is since you were the bad advice about the toy. A dildo that can be properly sanitized is one thing but a vibrator that cannot be fully sanitized is a Nother. At a minimum anything like that should be used with barriers for each partner, but at best new toys should be purchased for each partner.

Ugh. Bad autocorrect and cold medicine. *Sincerely bad advice my comment should say. @47

Rereading my own statement @46. I made it sound like continuing the affair with the married man is a good idea. I made it sound like having sex with a married man is like having a friends with benefits arrangement with a guy you know in college. You know you won't marry him, but the sex is good and it works for now so you sleep with him while you look for Mr. Right. Allow me a retraction. Those are things to consider, BUT ...

This is still a married man. He's the one violating his marriage vows. He's the one lying to his wife. He's the one saying he doesn't want to hurt when presumably if she knew she'd be hurt. Or she does know and she's hurt. That doesn't make DUM as big an asshole as Mr. Exciting, but she is still helping him cheat. Dump him and stop participating in the assholery.

Mr Registered - We don't really know LW1 well enough to know how her assessment pegs out on the board of sincerity and accuracy. The most interesting situation would be if her assessment were accurate but insincere - she doesn't really like it that much of it but it's better than she thinks.

If this were my novel, LW1 would be the kind of woman other women lecture and blame men perceived to be (relatively) high quality for not finding attractive. Then they'd start looking just like her, and what would happen next would be open to interpretation.

I’ll go with your second comment, Fichu @49, this woman is writing Dan about her cheating life and thinks some Married guy, who gives her a few half hours a week sexy times, is ever going to offer more. More fool her.
RE @46, that was funny. Reminds me of a piece of art done by Meret Oppenheim in the ‘30s, where she covered a cup, saucer and spoon in fur.

If I found out a boyfriend lied and said a sex toy was new because he thought I wouldn't want it stuck in me otherwise...I would immediately break up with them.

CESS says Dan encourages people to act on their worst impulses; they obviously don’t read the columns. Dan offers very moral and kind advice.
CESS has been subjected to some horror brainwashing, and has repressed their true orientation. An orientation that is fixed.
This sad writer is so twisted up with their own desires, spitting shit all over Dan reduces the pressure.
Live your true self CESS. God never wants any of us to lie to ourselves.
Mr Venn, you mentioned last week you were upset with the movie “ Boy Erased”; was it not following the book? I bought the book recently, a memoir, haven’t had the courage to read it yet.

Why don’t women carry their own toys, especially ones that go inside them. What ever happened to fingers and tongues? This is why so many men are lousy with their fingers, they don’t practice enough.

@54 LavaGirl: Agreed and seconded.

Who's up for this week's Lucky @69 Award? Tick...tick...tick...

Now for L3. The first thing that pops into mind is LW's "I couldn't help myself:" Yes. She. Could. A peek or perhaps even watching one video or part of one before coming to herself is something maybe a skilled barrister could get the jury to find just within the boundary. But LW watched THE videoS (presumably all of the several sent out). More Than Once. Despite her efforts to paint herself as Linnet Doyle claiming it couldn't have been helped that Simon realized he loved her and not Jackie, LW definitely made just as conscious a choice to watch the videos multiple times as Linnet did to exercise her charm in pursuit of Simon. [The alternative to this would have been "Emma could not resist" when she pointed out that Miss Bates would be limited as to number in saying only three (things very dull indeed) at once.]

The next thing that popped out was LW's general attitude. Moving from Simon Doyle in Death on the Nile to Simon Foster in A Fairly Honourable Defeat, L3 really reads almost like a brag. The word that came to mind was feckless, which recalled a passage early in the novel.

"You're a d*** muddler, Simon," Axel had once said to him angrily. "It's a moral fault and it's not charming." Simon reflected and realized how much in the past he had traded on the charm of a certain fecklessness. ("Oh, you flibbertigibbet, you!" one of Axel's predecessors had been used to cry, while Simon hung his head coyly.)

LW seems to want to be let off with a tap on the wrist and a, "Naughty, Naughty!" with a smirk attached. She things being a woman mitigates her offence. She thinks liking MM pron mitigates her offence. She thinks the beauty and profession of the men involved mitigates her offence. If I were to think of another fictional Simon of whom LW3 reminds me, it might be Simon Barsinister from Underdog.

There is some possibility LW3 can use awareness of her moral fault, in ranking her own jollies above ethical treatment of material received knowing the distribution to be non-consensual, to help her guard against repeated instances, but she will need a good deal more remorse and a good deal less self-indulgence before she'll be able to pull that off. Of Mizz Liz's suggested actions, I fear it's already too late for B; she's almost certainly already told. "Only a little bad" might apply if she'd only watched one video, once. As for C, she'd better do all she can to wipe any such feelings out of her mind if at all possible, perhaps by developing a stronger passion for someone OS.

I hope for the cousin's sake that he's bi, as that will perhaps remove an additional layer of ick when he finds out.

What's tricky for LW3 is that, in order to do as much as she can to make up to her cousin, she is going to have to accept the appearance of a great deal of virtue that she does not possess. If she really wants to become "only a little bad," this will be hard for her. I'm reminded of Mr Savage's advice to one-time-only cheaters who take their secrets to the grave.

As to whether LW3 will ever be able to tell C3 decades later, perhaps better not. The idea recalls to mind David Rees' story Watsonville, in which a middle-aged couple has a serious falling out when Alan reveals he'd kept the little black book in which one of their sixth-form classmates kept records of the clientele to whom he sold oral favours during the lunch period (the book revealed that both Alan and Stephen had been clients during the other's absence; decades later, Stephen became furious that Alan knew all along when he'd spent years and years feeling so guilty).

Ms Lava @53 - According to the article, the film followed the book, but I think it would have been possible to honour the author's spirit of forgiveness without making the parents sympathetic characters. Even if one entirely buys the director's stated intent, what is likely to happen is that the coddling of the parents will just be taken by anyone else inclined to inflict such barbarism on a minor as a way of letting themselves off the hook.

Curious Cousin (aka SAW, aka LW3) -
For good or bad my advice relies solely on real life experiences, as expressed by myself and others while sitting in circles:
Forgive yourself and move on. Yes, you sexualized a family member, yet came to your senses and deleted the video, knowing all along that real action is out of the question.
People may include family members in their fantasies and masturbation sessions. Some do so in their teen years, experiences and triggers may vary.

Sex toys etiquette suggestion- maintain cleanliness and offer a condom option in situations you think they aren’t needed.

There may grammatical mistakes or typos in my post.

"be"

@57: Whether the cousin's bi or not, it doesn't make what lw#3 (SAW) did okay.
SAW knew her cousin was mortified and humiliated and she went ahead and watched the video anyway.

I guess I understand; it's not like there aren't other M/M videos made with the knowledge and consent of those being recorded, that are distributed ethically, featuring men with beautiful bodies available to wank to.

Oh. Never mind.

When it comes to who gets to stick what in our bodies, we're allowed to be arbitrary, inconsistent, capricious, and even illogical.

Meanwhile, men who don't want to get vasectomies are big whiny baby-men afraid of a little owie.

C'mon Dan, give us more than zero effort here.

@ Sanguisa & RE

Also thanks Sanguisa and LW for that perspective- this was a thing I did not know existed. As to RE's point, yes me too, but I did not realize this was a thing that people had fetishes for nor that it was correlated with a certain body type. It just seems a convenient position with the right person because I hate hate hate to feel smothered but I like the angle if I'm not being smothered.

@37 Chris

Yes I thought that too. If he's serious- that's shit advice. Seriously I get that Dan, being a kinkster and sex advice columnist married to another kinkster who's into gear, probably takes extra care to keep his sex toys clean and uber hygienic. But this is not the case for all people, and I have the right to decide which toys to use. A toy fresh from a box, unused- well I'd be more likely to trust most people in this situation. A toy from a drawer, used god knows when on god knows who and washed god knows how (if even) that is pulled out in an instant in which the person may not be showing best judgement? No no no no no. Not OK to lie about that shit either.

Also I don't know about y'all but my own vibrator is small and cannot be inserted anyway- it's shaped to use externally and discreetly as I prefer neither power (no hitachis for me) nor penetration (no dildos for me), and there is no way you could wrap a condom around it. The hygiene, in my case, is a secondary concern because I'm very sensitive and the thought of one that I didn't specifically choose and have experience using just sounds like clit mashing discomfort.

@Venn- she's already not really a good person or she wouldn't have watched it, and she's aware of that enough to ask but not enough to actually change. She wants someone to tell her it's OK. I don't think she thinks any of those things mitigates it- she's just describing the reality of her situation. The reality is, she is not a good enough person to not violate someone else's privacy. Whether or not she is a good enough person to care about the harm she does to someone else (by bragging for example) is uncertain. My suspicions are similar to yours- some people feel guilty about a thing and try to make up for it by downplaying how bad it is by being super casual about it. That could include bragging about it, why else write to Dan?

@Sporty

Men who don't want vasectomies are fine. Men who don't want vasectomies and instead expect their females to carry the heavy lifting of reproductive control (through ongoing hormonal birth control or else through tube tying) are a prob. If you don't want a vasectomy, that is your prerogative. Responsible alternatives include always wearing a condom, not cumming inside your partner, and/or limit your partners to women that prefer to take bc or get her tubes tied. Also please note that you bring up a scenario that has not actually happened nor is relevant just so you can get pissed off about it.

Matt. 15:10-11
"He summoned the crowd and said to them, 'Hear and understand.
It is not what enters one’s mouth that defiles that person; but what comes out of the mouth is what defiles one.'”

Nocute @ 61, EL @ 63
LW3 certainly crossed some boundaries. If I were the humiliated cousin I’d find it further degrading knowing a family member was sexualizing/fetishizing the situation.

From LW’s perspective I see an ongoing interest in m/m action. I assume she had noticed her cousin before and, who knows, maybe it was him who sparked this whole gay porn interest to begin with. Now that she’s watching it regularly she all of a sudden gets a video, not sure what’s in it, OMG, let me see this again, then finally comes to her senses and deletes it.

I didn’t see her writing to Dan as bragging. She may have been expected an unconditional exoneration, yet possibly also sensing boundary issues. If this is the case in other aspects/situations in her life then she should seek others’ opinions, be it professionals and/or a circle of some sort.

Agree with the comments to VIBE. Using your own logic, you put a condom on your dick because it's been in more than one person, right? (RIGHT?) So put a condom on the toy if it's been used on someone else. Agree that vibrators can be too expensive to want to purchase a new one for each partner, but condoms are free at the clinic, and you can use the cheap ones because the vibrator can't feel the difference.

Lava @54: Your comment ties with Sporty's @62 as Comment That Makes The Least Sense. Whatever happened to variety? I don't think VIBE was whipping out a toy because he didn't want to use his fingers or tongue. I think it's more likely that he has heard that Women Like Vibrators, or had an ex-girlfriend who really liked them or even found it difficult to come any other way, and wanted to have options for getting his partners off. Nothing wrong with that, in fact, yay for men who keep vibrators on hand! You think that women should just carry a vibrator in their handbag, like condoms, just in case? Wut? Women who like vibrators do buy their own, which they generally keep at home. Women who can only get off with a vibrator often do buy one to keep at an established partner's house. I say established partner because many men would take offense if a woman pulled out a toy and asked him to use it on her on the first date. You're meeting men who are lousy with their fingers? Instruct them. They haven't been rubbing their own clits for decades like we have; tell them what you like! If they don't want to learn, THEN kick them to the curb.

Emma @63: +1 to the continuing confusion over vibrators vs dildos. I apologise for not making the clarification myself.
I think if someone kept an toy in their dresser, and cleaned it before using it on me, I would be fine with that. Agree that even if all it's been collecting is dust, it's not a nice thing to have in one's vagina.

Venn @57, I don't see what being bisexual would do to ameliorate the situation. Even if the cousin DID have an attraction to women, and DID enjoy the idea of a woman watching him have sex with his partner, he wouldn't want this to be a cousin and he wouldn't want her to do it without his consent. It's the consent that's the key here, not his orientation.

Fan @66, if a woman needs a vibrator to orgasm then having her own would seem sensible. Don’t women carry their own condoms, not sure how including a vibrator is such s stretch. I wouldn’t want some random vibrator, even with a condom over it.

Congrats, Lava @69!
If a woman cannot orgasm any other way but from a vibrator, then perhaps she would carry one around in her handbag. I can't see it as analogous to carrying condoms. Condoms are much smaller and easier to tuck away. Imagine finding oneself unexpectedly entering a club or building where one's bags are searched, and staff stumbling across one's vibrator! One can have unexpected casual sex without a vibrator; one cannot (or at least should not) without a condom. Sure, for those few women who are both very into casual sex and unable to come without a vibrator, they could carry one. Vibe-on-the-go seems pretty unnecessary to me. Just take him to your place where your toy collection lives.

Ms Cute/Ms Fan - As I said, it might remove one layer of ick. There would still be plenty of ick to go around. I'd be thoroughly mortified if any videos of my own private encounters were made and distributed without my consent. But I'd be maybe 5% less mortified if the one viewer were, say, Mr Ophian or perhaps Mr Alan, instead of, say, Ms Ods or Ms Erica. It would be 10% less if it were Mr Ricardo, as I'd have the further mini-consolation that at least he'd know that his guess as to the nature of my private specialty was quite wrong.

@32. Bi. 'More than entitled'='entirely justified'. This new, judgmental use of 'entitled' is too ubiquitous, in my book. I agree that wanting to be face-sat does not make you a sub.

@33. Registered European. You're right--there's no note of ambivalence about the lw's size in her letter. It’s possible BTB experiences some cognitive dissonance in being part of a subculture that cherishes heft (a fat-pride subculture or a black 'love the booty' subculture) and at the same being subject to the pressures, the generalized disapproval, of a general culture that's censorious about obesity. If this isn't so--if she isn't potentially conscious of her body in a negative way during sex--then I have trouble understanding why she is so averse to face-sitting as one of (say) fifty sexual positions and activities. It could just be that there is a kinky or D/s practice of ALWAYS getting big women to sit, and it's come to wear on her. But this wouldn’t explain why she keeps drawing guys with this expectation on a profile presumably designed to attract Doms.

@49. Fichu. I didn't think your first advice was terrible. The burden of it was that the LW should look for a partner who will be with her, which is surely right.

Mx Wanna - As I mentioned earlier, your interpretation would have been reasonable had it been one video seen once. While it's unclear whether she knew what was in the first video when she watched it (I'm leaning towards the interpretation that she knew or had a strong idea it wasn't her cousin's doing when she looked at the second one if not the first), watching several videos more than once is going too far.

There's a satisfaction in what she seems to see as her own naughtiness that is at least highly consistent with bragging. Note also that she doesn't say anything about her cousin beyond noting his beauty and his profession - no concern for his welfare or how she can support him. Her only point of interest is how naughty she was.

If I were in the cousin's position (supposing I was in my early to mid-twenties), there would be lots of people I cared more about their watching the videos than the LW. Figures one generation older, authority or mentor figures and family members, for a start.... Possibly I would be more mortified that a former partner could do such a thing, than by the thought of the recipients watching me having sex. If the cousin is relatively distant from the LW, there's a chance he might want to withdraw from her--to duck or dissociate himself from all the people on the list he doesn't absolutely have to see. She should maybe head this off by reinitiating cordial contact, making only passing and sympathetic reference to the ex's appalling betrayal of trust.

@75. Venn. I would think she feels guilty. She isn't necessarily bragging.

HBTB @73 She could be averse to face-sitting because it's a "dommy" activity and she is a sub. But who knows? Not liking any sexual activity does not require a reason.

As for why she keeps drawing "face-sittees" to her profile, I suppose that is because the guys in question ignore the profiles and just message all women with a "fabulous ass".

@63 do you listen to the Podcast? He aired an entire string of calls essentially implying the only reason a man wouldn't get a vasectomy is because they're wimps afraid of pain. It was quite incredible, really a five minute taunting session. Personally, I think getting a vasectomy is fine, and also not getting a vasectomy is fine, but really, I'm just noting the contrast: on one hand "hey, you're allowed to not want something in your body even if it's totally safe, you don't need a good or logical reason, it's your body!", versus "you should feel obligated to get this surgery and you are less than a man if you don't" on the other. Like, have a principle, please.

I’m really surprised, Dan that you would encourage VIBE to lie about a toy. WTH? I mean if a woman is ok or not ok w using a used toy, react accordingly. But to lie? Very disappointed with that answer. Ewww.

Lava @54: Your suggestion that women should carry vibrators reminds me of a story. A partner of mine was visiting, and as she arrived and was taking off her coat and boots I heard a faint buzzing sound coming from her suitcase. "What's that noise? Do you hear something?" I asked. Blushing, she admitted that one of the vibrators she'd packed for the weekend had somehow been turned on accidentally! So there's your answer to why women don't carry vibrators around with them.

M?? Harriet - While there are people who manifest a sense of guilt by presenting a front of a lack of such a sense, LW3 just doesn't strike that note. I tried looking at her from that angle, but then the letter is wrong. Not necessarily bragging, perhaps, but she certainly doesn't seem to regret her actions.

Ms Fan @81 - Very US QaF. Melanie and Lindsay had to hide one when they had a surprise visit from Tanith and Philip (the mediocrities who ran the Gay and Lesbian Centre). It ended up under a sofa cushion, but was detected when one of the visitors sat on it. Melanie improvised by grabbing it and sticking it into a potted plant.

Why buy another vibrator? Put an [oftentimes free] condom on it. Helps with cleanup, too.

Ms Fan @81 - Very US QaF. Melanie and Lindsay had to hide one when they had unexpected guests, one of whom sat on it.

“But my dick has been in other women,” said the guy whose argument was about to backfire on him in the dumbest possible way.

@21 BDF, I'm someone who could happily go the rest of my life without receiving oral. (I am glad to give, at least to men, although I'm no expert.) It causes me anxiety, it doesn't turn me on, and has never given me an orgasm. I'm not the only one; the cover article in the Atlantic Monthly that shows why younger Millennials/Gen Z ruined sex along with napkins and homeownership shows that women's self-reported enjoyment of oral sex is way down.

Some vibrators are more easy to discreetly carry around in one's purse (little bullet vibes), while others are much more bulky and enormous (Hitachi Magic Wands), and still others are not only large, but potentially embarrassing (Rabbit-style dildo/vibes).

When I needed a vibrator to come, you can bet I brought mine with me on dates. I also kept one at a boyfriend's house once things got to the "have-a-toothbrush-just-permanently-in-the-other-person's-bathroom" phase. But I prefer a type that isn't so easy to just unobtrusively throw into your purse. And I always, always have 2 condoms in my purse as well as 5 tampons, even though I've gone through menopause. "Be prepared" doesn't apply only to boy scouts.

I would be extremely put off by my bf pulling an obviously used--and un-condom-ed--dildo or dildo/vibe or an obviously used vibrator out of the bedside drawer. Not to mention that I believe most women have strong preferences in vibrators.

People are missing the point regarding the big-butted woman who attracts a lot of wannabe face-sittees. BGB never says she doesn't like cunnilingus; she doesn't say she has body-shame issues. (She may or she may not; she may or she may not. Both are irrelevant.)

She is very clear: she gets a lot of men approaching her asking her to do a sex act she dislikes--and that act is the face sittee being "smothered" as s/he is engulfed by the "fabulous butt." Some cunnilingus might follow, but that's not the main point of the fetish. And it is a fetish, which means that she and her her ass are being fetishized. And some people do not like being seen and responded to as the object of a fetish. Some people don't want their body fetishized, and they don't want to be so baldly objectified.

I don't know enough about this fetish to know whether those who have it are typically submissive. These men that flood BGB with messages tend to be submissive, however, and she is submissive herself, so they aren't compatible just from that perspective.

Unfortunately, there's not much she can do. People are going to see what they want to see. When presented with a curvy, full-figured woman with a "fabulous butt," a man who gets off on the idea of being smothered by a woman's big, fabulous butt is going to approach her with that desire in mind, even if she explicitly says in her profile that she is submissive, only wants dominant men, and doesn't want to sit on faces. Some men don't bother to read a word of text; they look at the photo, and if the woman has what they like physically or is perceived, based on her looks or body type, to be into what they are AND have what they like physically, they make a move, based on that information alone. (Hell, I used to have submissive younger men approach me in droves begging me to let them serve me as household slaves--not my thing--and I couldn't figure out where they got the idea, based on my profile, that that would be welcomed. So I asked. And two of them said it was because I looked "bossy" or "mean" because I have short hair! Remember what I said about people seeing what they want to see?)

And if she doesn't describe her body type or include a photo? Well, if she is full-figured and curvy (assuming that these are euphemisms for "busty, with a bug butt and overall overweight,"), she leaves herself open to criticism that she wasn't honestly representing herself or she leaves herself open to rude or hostile or hurtful responses when she meets the guy in person, if he is only interested in slender women. So keeping the size of her butt off her profile is not-advisable. Even though in addition to getting hit on by wannabe face-sittees, she risks being body shamed by those guys whose physical type she isn't. Because men do that, too: write unsolicited messages telling me that I sound fabulous, absolutely the BEST, and that my face is really pretty, but they could never date a disgusting fat cow such as me. When BGB said "dating when you're not thin is hard enough" she wasn't kidding.

I guess she can and should include the text that Dan suggested, but she should be prepared to get more than a few face-sitting fellows clamoring for her attention. And maybe she either ignores them, or sends a pre-written, canned "not interested, thanks" message and then blocks as necessary. And she needs to develop the hide of a rhino.

@Sporty no I do not listen to the podcast so there is some context for your story, sorry for assuming you were creating a grievance out of nowhere. The two situations do not seem at all relevant to me, however. From your description, it sounds like Dan was taking a reductive stance. But the issue of birth control affects both people, and if a man will not have a vasectomy, that is not purely his business - it is the business of the couple. There are alternatives, but traditionally men in long term relationships want to cum inside and don't want to always wear condoms, so if they likewise refuse a vasectomy, then they are just dumping all the reproductive control on their partner- despite the fact that side effects from pregnancy, hormonal bc and tube tying are all much more serious as well as more expensive. Of course there are all sorts of nuanced and unselfish ways a couple can manage their reproductive health without vasectomy, etc so it sounds like Dan was dismissive. But this is a terrible analogy for person not wanting some form of penetration or sex toy as the lack of those things has zero consequences for anyone and therefore requires no more justification nor discussion than "I don't wanna".

@69 Congratulations, LavaGirl, on scoring this week's Lucky @69 Award!! May a merry Winter Solstice abundance come your way well into the New Year!

Who's up for a HUnsky? Tick...tick...tick...
Speaking of which:
@81 BiDanFan: Similarly, I have had my Korg battery operated metronome go off accidentally in my flute duffle bag. At least I was keeping good time....lol

nocutename @89: "most women have strong preferences in vibrators" -- exactly! Find out what she likes and get that. Don't assume what worked on the last gf will please this one. (I'm a Hitachi girl, myself, so the gentle battery-powered ones just annoy the fuck out of me. I gather some people hate Hitachis just as much.)

PS @81: Forgot y'all are an American audience. My partner had come by train/bus, and had to endure part of her journey surrounded by other commuters who were no doubt wondering what the buzzing noise was, as well! Haha!

Venn @75: I also fail to see bragging. I see that she's turned on but also feeling guilty because she knows it was wrong to violate her cousin's privacy in this way.

DC270 @87: Re-read my post @21: "I know some aren't." Enough said.

Nocute @89: "most women have strong preferences in vibrators." I agree, but that still doesn't mean VIBE did anything wrong in suggesting the one he already had. Many women have strong preferences in penises, too, but that doesn't mean men shouldn't suggest using the ones they have! ;-) VIBE's only mistake was not taking no thanks for an answer and arguing with his girlfriend instead of suggesting he go clean the toy, use a condom on it, asking her to bring her own if that was something she was into, or moving on to other activities. Agree with Centrists @86 that he couldn't have come up with a dumber response if he'd tried.

Nocute @90: It would be super easy for BGB to use front-facing photos only. I agree with everything else you have said. Sending sympathies for the additional level of body shaming larger women have to endure from horrible men. (By which I mean men who are horrible, not that all men are horrible, before one of the usual suspects cries misandry on me.)

DC270 @87 "the cover article in the Atlantic Monthly that shows why younger Millennials/Gen Z ruined sex"

Thanks, I just read that. Pretty interesting. Especially the notion that, thanks to dating apps, "hitting on someone in person had, in a short period of time, gone from normal behavior to borderline creepy".

source: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/

Ms Fan - "More than once" is a bigger indicator of a bragging attitude than anything else is of her feeling guilty. It doesn't go with the things she mentioned that she thought were mitigating factors - excuses dressed as explanations. If you want an alternative (now I'm thinking of ardent defenders of Richard III, if we accept that neither the Duke of Buckingham nor Margaret Beaufort had access to the Tower), then I'll suppose that she could be someone "on the spectrum" not in tune with normal social cues. She doesn't feel she did anything wrong, but knows that other people think she did, and baldly asks for an assessment.

I also have a secondary hunch that the cousin is actually gay rather than bi, and that part of LW's enjoyment came from a sense of transgressing against his No Girls Allowed sign. This has led me to reflect that there ought to be a whole branch of porn with male performers made specifically for female consumption rather than male - it would be one of the most positive things to come from replacing G with V in the LBTQetc acronym.

Venn @98: You're totally overthinking this. Women who like gay porn don't like it because they're "transgressing against a No Girls Allowed sign." They like it because (a) it features sexy men, and they're attracted to men, so the more sexy men the better, (b) it's more taboo than straight sex, (c) there are no female bodies around to make them feel less sexy by comparison, and (d) no women were exploited during the filming of this porn. Also, for many it allows them to vicariously live the gay man fantasy Nocute was talking about, where you can have all of the sex with none of the risk. No one is trying to un-gay you by watching your fellow gays fuck on screen; these videos would be just as appealing to the female market if they were identical but the performers were described as "bi" rather than "gay."

Hate to break it to you, but male-on-male porn with a plot IS porn aimed at women. Just like most "lesbian porn" is aimed at straight men.

Also, I took "more than once" to clarify that she did it on purpose, really really on purpose; she didn't open a link without knowledge of what it was and then just inconveniently leave it running for a bit too long. Which is a factor in her question: "how bad a person am I?" A worse person than someone who opened it by accident and then didn't delete it immediately.

Venn, I do get you. I got similarly huffy when I was younger over "lesbian" porn. How dare straight men watch it? Girl-on-girl action is for us girls who like girls, how dare they sully our joy -- which was so elusive to me in real life -- with their male gaze. But the men who watch "lesbian" porn don't have an agenda of destroying real lesbianism, and indeed, probably wouldn't be at all turned on by most real lesbians. So both our huffiness is not just misplaced but completely ineffective in changing what turns people on. May as well rail against the unfairness of gravity.

@78. Registered European. This doesn't shed an enormous amount of light for me on what's happening. Is every profile of a larger or overweight subby woman on Fet inundated with requests from insensitive subby face-sittees? I don't think it is, but I just don't know. Is the whole of her profile too self-effacing? Perhaps she should assertively rewrite it, making clear she's a sub.

HBTB @102 "Is every profile of a larger or overweight subby woman on Fet inundated with requests from insensitive subby face-sittees? I don't think it is, but I just don't know. "

I don't know either, but given the carpet bombing-approach that many men apparently resort to in online dating it wouldn't surprise me.