I need to find Wednesday Martin's NY Times bestselling book. I'll be visiting Village Books again, soon. Thanks, Dan the Man!
(re ALU): "Little play". The LW's situation is different from mine, but after a Kevin McAllister-like upbringing, the term makes me cringe. For me, The Simpsons creator, Matt Groening, in his 1980s series of Hell books (i.e.: Life is Hell, School is Hell, Childhood is Hell, Work is Hell, etc.) summarized it best:
Q: "Why do [others] belittle you?"
A: "So you'll always be little."
And thus why I avoid family reunions.
@1: Since Griz made first post this week I will make a point to avoid landing on the @69th comment.
Why not ask your friend? From what I gather they are likely to be comfortable discussing the subject with you.
Tell them how you feel and ask why they find it appealing. How long did they have those desires? Were they uncomfortable with the idea just like you are? Did they struggle with fear, shame, disgust? How do they find partners and what kind of acts are working for them? How do they feel about all this once the action is over?
I’m sure they will be a great source. Some of us here have also touched on the subject.
We've discussed HUH already.
SOSO, absence makes the heart grow fonder. Don't move in with your partner. Fill your life with other things. If you miss them, you will be happier to see and spend time with them. That works for me!
ALU, not having to share all things with any given partner is what poly is all about. Your queerplatonic has someone she shares this kink with. You are not obligated to share it with her, too. Tell her it's not your thing and you'd rather it was something she kept between her and Other Partner. Polyamory does not mean discussing the details of your sex life with the partners who are not involved in it. Just tell her you don't want the details. I'm sure most other partners would prefer this approach, as well.
*Amendment, some poly people prefer to discuss their sex lives amongst their partners, I realise that my post @4 might imply that this is never a thing. It depends on the people involved. If you are dating a poly person and have a strong desire for privacy, it's worth having a conversation about what, if anything, you don't want them discussing with others. And if you are a poly person who has a kink for sharing every sexcapade with your primary, please tell your other partners this. Not everyone is keen to provide dirty-talk fodder for some other dude/gal/person. IME, it's reasonable to assume general information will be shared but not details. To the extent that it is ever "reasonable to assume" anything -- of course a conversation is better than assuming!
SOSO, Bonnie and Clyde found that robbing banks together added real vitality to their relationship.
ALU, it is not mandatory to stretch your zone of comfort, and learn about this kink, but I would suggest that you think about the reasons for your discomfort. Are there resources for you to learn about littles? @Dan provided one, and if you are on FetLife, there are many active littles groups where you can read about this relationship dynamic, but it seems to me that the very best source of information is the one person with whom you are now reluctant to speak. If you want to get past your misconceptions and biases about littles a good way to start is to discuss this with you friend.
I think when we are young folks like SOSO don't always realize that staying interesting is an active thing for both parties. You can switch partners every 1-2 years and hope there are always more partners into what you have on offer, or you can put effort into keeping things exciting. For the last LW, just sack/ovary up and ask them questions and listen. You will not get better at having slightly uncomfortable discussions by running away from them. Something about the "I just can't talk about" tumblr speak feeds into every stereotype of modern snowflakism. You can talk about it. You just don't want to.
Staying interested in somebody you know is correlated to being interesting with somebody you know.
Do new things that create a dopamine rush, whatever that is for you. Maybe it's hiking and rock climbing. Maybe it's solving logic puzzles. Maybe it's taking singing lessons or going to an open mic comedy night. Do these things together and seperately. Doing high dopamine activities together will simulate the the new relationship energy feeling. And doing them separately will keep you new and fresh to each other.
And get off Hunter's lawn.
Boy, was I disappointed there was no video clip of Patti, Bernadette, or Bette singing Some People at the end of the column! Even an audio clip of the great Ethel would have been great!!
Ms Fan - I'm not sure about my lawn, if I had one. Non-binary, while nobly conceived and conferring various benefits to many such as removing the stigma from liking "wrong" things or making it more okay for anybody to approach anybody, more or less, but, without gender, gay will die once the last of the gay couples is gone. At first a few people formerly identifiable as gay will manage to come together, but, without gay identity, art or spaces, all there will be will having to approach people at ridiculously high odds against success or, worse, giving in to the approaches of formerly identifiable women.
The abolition of gender may reach a pinnacle in the dissolution of discrimination, and the G (similarly the L) is (far?) more discriminatory than the S.
Again, very depressing. Everything depresses me lately, but then I've been seeing a huge amount of anti-Pride backlash of the nastier and more vitriolic ilk. I hate getting into Cassandra mode; so many more of the things I predict that I don't want to happen seem to come true.
Oof - I sensed I'd mucked up a sentence. Apologies to Ms Cute.
Venn @14: You confuse identifying as non-binary with erasing EVERYBODY's gender, which, I assure you, even if the most militant enbies hold that as their vision of utopia, is quite impossible. The majority of people will always identify as the gender associated with their biological sex. Fear not, no one will be making you stick your penis in any vaginas. You are free to identify as a man, as a gay man. It's variety and acceptance which are the virtues of those who support gender nonconformity. There will always be a G in LGBT. I agree the backlash against Pride is concerning. I don't know how the world manages to have so many hate-filled assholes in it. I worry for the next generations and can only take comfort in not having contributed to them. What more can I do? :(
Hunter @16: There are two people involved. Surely there would be no confusion in speaking about the two as "she" and "they." No justification for misgendering. Nor for your trolling attitude. "Relationship" can mean many things; ALU clearly has a close emotional connection with their long-distance person. A close emotional connection is not an "obsession"; there is no mention of whether ALU has other, physically closer partners; and concern about a kink they find distasteful is something most people would find difficult to talk to a partner about, monogamous or non. Hence writing to Dan to ask for help. Your contempt is thinly disguised jealousy over ALU's youth and freedom to fuck multiple people. Live and let live.
Bi @ 11 I admire Donny’s brevity but couldn’t find the emoji for my beverage coming out my nose!
Ditto Fan, Good one.
Anyone have a good tangent to liven up this week's thread?
A "men versus women" a.k.a. "genitalia wars" tangent usually works wonders.
The problem here is that the first letter, which could be useful for that, was already exhausted in a SLLOTD.
RE @21: Yes, and the other two letters were kind of damp squibs. Well, Dan's on holiday, he deserves some softballs now and again.
Hmm, how about a variation on the genitalia wars where we each argue from the perspective of the opposite gender? That would make that tired old trope more interesting. Hunter, failing to troll us into controversy. Nice try though.
Did anyone here ever got involved in little play or has any ideas/desires in this regard?
As I mentioned few years ago I was once pretend “nursing” someone, stroking their hair gently as they worked on my breast forms.
Nowadays I’m a doll on occasion, having someone dressing me up, loaning me to friends on occasion or invite them over for a play date.
As I recall someone told us about a sex club simulated public park situation where they could be a pretend young girl sitting on a bench. Men could expose themselves awhile girls could watch and touch.
Is this icky? Is it sexy? What’s your little play if any?
Sounds like you’re having fun CMD, can’t remember the park bench scene, I don’t always read every line though. Not a fantasy that I find sexy.
I did want to act, and enjoyed the one course I did before the onslaught of babies came. I did a scene from Death of a Salesman, for assessment, after sneaking off before into the toilets.. ffs, what was I thinking.. to have a little smoko. It inhanced my performance and everybody clapped.
Oh you mean other sorts of plays.
Fun in your plays, pretend or otherwise, CMD.
CMD @24: I can't say that this interests me at all. Though the references to role play brought the first episode of the latest season of Black Mirror to mind. Has anyone seen it? Lots of Savage-related themes there, like the nature of fidelity, the fluidity of both gender and sexual orientation, and the line between fantasy and reality. I thought it was bold to cast the main characters as African American men, given the greater stigma against homo/bisexuality in that community than perhaps in others. Would be interesting to hear Sportlandia's take.
This is sad. No Fan, haven’t seen that show. I don’t have Netflix etc hardly have decent reception for free to air. So I read instead.
We could talk politics seeing Dan avoids it these days. How the children are being treated at the US borders, how my govt treats refugees.
Trump with his mid flight change to retaliation and for what? A US drone, over Iran, of course they would shoot it down. Now another alleged Trump rape and nobody cares or much believes her.
Good to read some US states are signing up to go with the popular national vote, ie democracy, at next presidential election. It’s a start.
One of my partners has some fantasies about young girls and abuse, which I gather is not the same as little play? He likes for me to pretend that I was abused. I think for him it’s about taboo - the more inappropriate an idea is, the more he’s turned on. It’s not my favorite way to play, but I’m submissive so I think of going along with that fantasy as serving him and that turns me on, so it all works out. I don’t have any real trauma that would be triggered by that kind of fantasy and he is quite safe and sane in my experience, so I’m not worried that I’m encouraging any real abusive inclination. But obviously it’s something that has crossed my mind and I wonder if people who do little play worry about that too. I also wonder why this gives me any pause, when I have zero qualms about rape fantasies for example - must just be the strength of the protective instinct towards children?
@23. Bi. Sure--I'll be myself.
@14. venn. 'Gay politics' got about 20% of the heterosexual population on its side, and 'queer politics' has gotten about 60%. Might this have something to do with the respective self-presentations of 'gay' and 'queer'?
@22: Would you mind giving us all a list of everything and everyone you actually APPROVE of? I'm sure it would be brief, if it even exists. Did the entire human race piss on your azeleas or something?
Well, rats! Is it just that so many are gone due to summer (Happy Summer Solstice as of Friday, June 21st!)? Any takers for the Lucky @69 Award this week?
@31: Forget it, @22's trolling. I try to avoid responding every time I see his avatar.
There we go! Some good old-fashioned misogyny. RE, you're correct that this always gets a thread going. Dadddy, there's no evidence whatsoever that HUH's wife is not the breadwinner in this relationship, and/or that she hasn't spent most of the past 23 years putting in 80-hour weeks to raise his kids. Using him for what? Generosity where? Yes, he should divorce her, regardless of who's been "using" whom and for what purpose. And go find himself a woman who'd otherwise be dating Dadddy, so they'll both be much better off.
I read there is concern re the chemicals sprayed on dope plants. Growing one’s own is the only way.
@31, Alaska, I haven’t seen azeleas in a long time. Maybe they don’t grow in the sub tropics, where I now live.
My dad planted a big row, leading to the front gate, of camellias, every conceivable variation of colour, at one of my childhood homes.
@37: Sorry, it was a random floral reference-I was just trying to think of some sort of flower that would be associated with privilege and snobbery-and it was aimed at the troll with the scowling avatar. What would have been a more Seattle-appropriate flower for that purpose, in your view?
@38 AlaskanbutnotSeanParnell: Skunkweed.
She was attracted to him for a year or so, then something died. Why would he put up with this for a further twenty yrs, then think, I might pass this problem by someone.
Not to kiss, that is total rejection of intimacy.
Who knows why she lost any desire for him. We have no more clues than what’s presented here. Both have allowed such a sub par relationship to go on for two decades.
She cracked first, had an affair, which caused a light bulb to finally go off in the LW’s head. And here we are.
They have to stop this charade, and clearly part. Emotionally, they have been apart for two decades. Now, they need to finish the job and physically part.
There are those who don’t want to kiss, reject giving or receiving oral. These people find each other, and work their intimacy in their own fashion.
That’s not what has happened here.
Dadddy, read the comments on the original SLLOTD. Many theories have been presented.
And you think it's vanilla people who have no imagination?
From the actual facts presented in the letter, this woman has withdrawn affection and is selfish and cruel and a CPOS. There is no need to manufacture other reasons to DTMFA.
Sure, they can. And this one was. Doesn't mean she was also a "parasite." Only one reason for leaping to that conclusion instead of any other.
Your post @44 reeks of "I know you are but what am I?" If you'd actually read the comments I'd linked, you'd have seen several suggestions of what might have been going on here. Religious background. She discovered she was a lesbian. He cheated. No evidence for any of these, since the LW never actually said. No evidence of a financial imbalance, either. You just decided that because she's a woman, this must be the dynamic. The very definition of misogyny.
@46 AlaskanbutnotSeanParnell: You're most welcome.:)
No Lucky @69 Award this week? Anyone interested in two Lucky @69s for the week of June 25--July1st upon landing on this week's @69?
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134