Well I hope she read Dan's response and was able to have a nice dinner.
Vacillating between titillation and anxiety is a healthy place to be. Don’t let being anxious about getting anxious derail you. You need to say everything to your husband that you’ve said to Dan, and he needs to pass it all along to his friend.
Do you want to watch or participate? Which would be easiest? What scenarios have you sneaking away for a wank? Talk to your husband about that too, and if you go ahead with this visit, you can start with a scripted scene. It’s very likely that your husband and his friend will be nervous too.
Good luck, and congratulations on the new baby!
Somewhere along the way, I noticed that all the orgies and sexual escapades with the horde of pretty creatures I was holding out for weren’t a realistic option. But if you’re sitting at home with the dog while your friends party and the fantasy beckons, you may just have to go for it.
From your description of wanting to be group fucked, it sounds like you might be a wee bit subby. Perhaps, if she’s not interested in Dan’s suggestion to explore together, your girlfriend would be open to you beginning your exploration with a pro Domme?
I guess everybody is off watching the World Series, huh?
This is not to dissuade you from realizing your fantasy nor shaming you. I just want to point that there’s another person whose needs should be taken into account in this equation that neither Dan nor the guest expert touch on. Yes, the baby.
Again, not saying that what you want cannot be realized, and I truly hope all goes well. Just be aware that as much as babies, and children of any age, can sense and react to their parents’ joy they also absorb the parents down time.
I think the suggested no sex dinner can be a good first step that will help you and others evaluate the feelings and give all involved some clues as how they want to proceed.
Interesting that LW1 closed with wondering about the accuracy of her label.
A2 was reasonably well played, but I can certainly empathize with LW2. I've tried things that seemed interesting that it turned out I found vile. Luckily I didn't have to dump anyone to find out.
fubar @ 2 already touched on the fantasy vs. reality disparity among often clueless newcomers, and I can vouch for this from my own experience.
His suggestion for seeing a pro while avoiding “feelings” can be something you can negotiate with your gf if you agree to provide her with something, sexual or not, that she wants.
I know all this sexual safari-ism is great for Dan's bottom line, but now I know I'm officially old because all I am thinking after reading this week's column is, gee, people sure are willing to go to a lot of bother to get off.
Is cuckolding substantially different from polyamorous compersion? I (nb) absolutely get off on my partners going on dates, but thought of it as a happy poly thing rather than a hot kink thing.
(Also, where do I sign up for these strapon orgies)
@1 WA-HOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Congratulations to raindrop on scoring this week's FIRDT! Award honors! Savor your numeric accolades in leading theh comment thread and bask in your envied glory.:)
@2 fubar: WA-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! Congratulatioins on hitting this week's SECNOD! numeric honors and being among the first three commenters to lead the thread. Bask in your envied glory.:)
@3 slomopomo: WA-HOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Congratulations on scoring this week's THIRDT! honors and being among the firs three commenters leading the thread. savor your numeric riches and bask in the glory found only here in Savage Love Land. :)
All other SL commenters participating (possibly our Dan the Man, too), there are more numeric prizes still to come with the start of this new week. The luscious Lucky @69 Award is next. Good luck to all!
CCC: You're bi! Is she also bi? Then problem solved. You take the lead with her in bed, focusing most of your attention on each other. The emotion he feels about this is unlikely to be jealousy. She has asked to have dinner with you both, which is a good sign -- it means she's interested in how you feel about this, at minimum, and potentially that she's interested in you. If you don't want to be left out, make a condition of the threesome that you take centre stage.
If there's no chemistry (for you, her or both) when you meet in person, then you'll have to go back to reconciling your feelings of unsexy jealousy with turned-on jealousy, and I'm afraid I have to leave that one to the experts. Take things slow and communicate, the universal bits of good advice. Most male cucks seem to want to direct the action, and I guess this is why -- they feel "safe" if they're the ones in charge, if their partners don't do anything unless/until they're feeling turned on by it, instead of insecure and scared. Cucking seems like topping from the bottom, which is fine so long as everyone understands that dynamic. Specify that this dinner is dinner only, and ask your husband to pay equal attention to you and to his friend, with a "safeword" agreed if he gets carried away with the new shiny. The way -he- handles this dinner should tell you whether he can be trusted to indulge this kink of yours without making it all about him. Good luck.
Great suggestion for STRAPON. Also a good point that these acts are easy to fantasise about, harder to realise. A strap-on gang bang sounds like a very tall order; sex workers may be required. Much cheaper just to re-read the works of Patrick Califia and masturbate. How about you and the girlfriend read orgy erotica to each other, and see if she gets turned on by this? Agree completely with Dan that including the girlfriend in the proposed explorations is, well, the polite and caring thing to do (which makes me wonder why she didn't think of it) and more likely to be warmly received. If nothing else, it can be the beginning of an expansion to their pillow talk, which might be sufficient for STRAPON, at least for now.
Fubar @2: "It’s very likely that your husband and his friend will be nervous too." Good point -- another reason why being open about her feelings -- why ALL of them being open about their feelings -- is so important.
Wam @9, yes. The difference is this element of humiliation that cucks find a turn-on. For polyamorous people, their partners being with others isn't humiliating. Also, for polyamorous people, the openness goes both ways -- we're just as entitled to have other partners as our partners are, whether we act on that or not. Lastly, compersion as I understand it is an emotional thing -- I'm happy to see my partner in a happy relationship or excited about a new shiny -- while cucking is a strictly sexual thing -- I'm turned on by the idea of my partner fucking other people. Some polyam people are indeed turned on and want to hear the details of their partners' other experiences, but this is not in any way universal, while it's the key element of cucking.
Wam, if you "get off" on your partners going on dates, then it seems you have a bit of a hotwifing/hotpartnering kink going on in addition to being polyam, which is different from cucking because it doesn't involve eroticising your humiliation at being cheated on. I (polyam and bi/pansexual) am happy if my partners are dating nice people, but I don't have sexual fantasies about them.
YEEEEEEOOOWWWW!! Congrats to Auntie G for scoring the highly coveted first tenerth (??!) comment! Extra loud beeps to the one who gets the next deca comment! Hope Dan is feeling good this week, and Mr Venoniminonymous- we all love you both dearly. Hope your week is great!
Oh look. Aeros has dressed up as Griz for Halloween. Aren't you cute. Imitation is the highest form of flattery!
BiDanFan @11: Whether or not "he can be trusted to indulge this kink of yours without making it all about him" is an excellent point. Therein lies the magic sauce! Hopefully, Mr. CCC knows that, or drops by and reads it here.
Color me confused. CCC starts the letter with "I'm a 33-year-old straight female" but mysteriously by the middle of the letter she says "I'm bi".
The more important question with regard to whether CCC could be an active participant or not would seem to me to be the other woman's orientation. She may have insisted on meeting the LW to do her due diligence, rather than from some unspoken desire for a threesome...
I don't think the LW is ready for any of this. Until she knows what she wants, I agree with the advice Dan gave - don't let the timeline of the visit push you into doing something you don't know if you really want.
The mind of a mother of a one year old, JibeHo @15. Lack of sleep can make one confused.
What are these new parents thinking is my response. Sure, some are able to sail thru these situations & continue to parent with ease. You gotta ask yourself LW1, are you & your husband those people?
And now with this woman coming to visit, perhaps expecting some action, you ask for help. No pressure.
JibeHo.@16. Old age is my excuse.
@13 aeros66: lol You must be fun at parties. :D
@14 BiDanFan: lol Others can copy but I am the one and only uniquely Griz. :D
@13 aeros66: Anyway, rather than accept a TENTH! award, I'd prefer to hold out for the luscious Lucky @69 Award honors or the Big Hunsky. But thank you for playing and good luck at hitting a Lucky Number!
CCC is giving last week's SICK a run for her money in the "Worst Timing and Life Situation in Which to Open One's Marriage" Award. She and Mr. CCC have an infant at home, for crying out loud. They are at a stage of life where absolutely they have a thousand other things that are more deserving of their attention than trying to rope a flirty friend into some flavor of sexual liaison. And I think CCC is royally underestimating how new motherhood will likely play into and amplify any jealous fallout that may occur if they try to push forward with this idea.
Also, I just can't wrap my head around these folks who go from "intensely jealous" to "I'm a cuck now!" Personally I just don't trust it.
Jibeho @16 - excellent catch that CCC goes from describing herself as "straight" to "bi" after a few sentences. It sounds like there's a lot she's uncertain about regarding her sexuality. Slow your roll alllll the way down, CCC.
Yes, good catches. CCC is a brand new mother and doesn't even know what her sexual orientation is. Put the brakes on. CCC's husband's friend, in the event you're reading this, cancel the dinner plans, pronto!
CCC: How much have you discussed these anxieties with your husband? Does he know how conflicted and nervous you are? If he's a decent guy, he'll back off completely and immediately, which might take the pressure off of you to get things all figured out about this meet up.
I'm also curious about the transition from the "insanely hot" fantasizing to the first discussion about flirty girl. Had you been giving him signals that you wanted to perhaps escalate the fantasy into real life? Do you think that was the reason he mentioned her flirting to you in the first place, as a way of checking to see if you wanted to upshift into an actual threesome? If he was responding carefully to what he thought you wanted, he might feel a little jerked around now, even though it is of course your right to say no at any time. All the more reason to make sure he knows about the depths of your anxieties and concerns.
wambenger @9 "(Also, where do I sign up for these strapon orgies)"
While you might have options that I don't, being a cat DAD I find the only place I can sign up for lesbian encounters is in my own head. Again you might have other options, but for a "roomful of HOT lesbians with strapons" I'm guessing your own head is the best place to look,
With a little practice the one can do a lot with ones own imagination.
Though, re-reading, I see that "a roomful of hot women" was Dan's contribution, the letter writer wrote "a group of women". A "group" could be the girl friend and a guest (and the guest could be in the letter writers own head, or a silicone toy)
A roomful of hot lesbians with strapons where men are invited to be present? How about a Peg the Patriarchy party?
Peg the Patriarchy party sounds good!
@Griz- I am fun at parties, too- wasn’t sure if others were allowed to celebrate the numbers as well.
But at this comment rate, #69 sounds a long ways away…screams
fubar @26 - I suppose I've lost my sense of humor because I am definitely not amused. I'm gonna pull a Venn here and declare a blanket lesbian offense at the "hot lesbian(s) performing for hetero males" trope. It is tiresome and offensive. I apologize if it seems I've lost my sense of humor, but it seriously needs to stop.
@13 & @27 aeros66: Of course you and everyone can celebrate the Lucky Numbers game. That is its purpose and to add a little fun to the comment threads. I thought you were being funny. I haven't thought much about adding new Lucky Numbers other than FIRDT!, SECNOD!, THIRDT!, Lucky @69, The Big Hunsky @100, The Double Whammy @169, The Double Hunsky @200, and so on within each week's Savage Love column.
In the past there have been suggestions from fellow commenters from both sides of the scale ranging between enthusiastically adding more Lucky Numbers, restricting them to one or two Lucky Numbers only, (i.e.: FIRDT!) on down to a whiny 'Why is this a thing?'.
I have had commenters respond that their own personal luck has changed for the better from landing on Lucky Numbers. To me, this is what makes the spontaneity of landing on a fortuitous number in the comment thread even more fun and worth vying for. I hope it is for you, too.
Still, adding new Lucky Numbers is worth pondering if you and plenty of fellow commenters feel there is too big a gap between Lucky Numbers between THIRDT! and the luscious Lucky @69. Sixty-three comments between Lucky Numbers (@3 - @69) is indeed a lot.
Dan and fellow commenters?
@21 & @22 fantastic_mrs_fox: Agreed and seconded re CCC on slowing things down however horny she may be postpartum. While addressing the LW's sexual needs is important, she and her husband of ten years have a new baby added to the household mix. It sounds as if the LW feels confused about whether she's straight or bi. As for cuckqueaning with her husband's flirty female friend, I think it's certainly best to go slowly--or if CCC is really feeling uncomfortable, not at all--when unsure.
JubeHo @28; second your dismay at some of these hetero boys having to be included in everything!
Grizelda @29, I’m fine with the lucky numbers left as they are. It makes them more special having just a few.
CCC, so much angst to share, so little time.
@31 LavaGirl: I agree. There had been some discussion about adding Lucky Numbers, but it just seems like that would be overdoing it. Currently it's all the more exciting when Lady Luck strikes.
Crazy @25/Fubar @26, yes, at least STRAPON is realistic enough to not require all the women in her orgy to be hot. Where's Venn to call Dan out for erasure of the non-hot women in STRAPON's fantasy? That's right -- all fantasy sex is by definition hot, and this is for sure a fantasy. As for a "group" versus a "roomful," if STRAPON lives in New York City, these would be the same thing. I pictured STRAPON's "group" as being maybe four or five.
Also, neither STRAPON nor Dan specified that these women must be lesbians, so perhaps I'll have a shot at the invite list? ;)
As for how to make this a reality, it really seems like something that would require months or years of prep. Find out where the kinky queer women hang out, go to those clubs and munches, and make friends. Mention this fantasy and see who's into it. Once you have a group that's two to three times as large as the number of people you actually hope will turn up, set a date, hire a dungeon or hotel room or convince the person with the nicest home to host, and send out your invites. Or just hire some sex workers.
And agreed, the men can and should stay home. Pegging is consensual and hot, and as such, the patriarchy does not deserve it. :)
Griz @33, I agree that we don't need any more lucky numbers. This game is fun for some, annoying for others, so it makes sense to keep it as it is. It does lighten up the discussion, but this is primarily a place to discuss the letters to Dan, though it has taken many tangents over the years. This week is pretty quiet so far. Anyone have any sex or relationship conundrums they'd like amateur advice on?
My feeling with STRAPON is that she should be a lot more solicitous of, and just interested in, her partner's feelings than her letter shows. She just says her partner isn't 'into it'. What does that mean? What did she say? Did her partner issue a blanket 'no'? What is Partner afraid of? Being abandoned? Or jealousy, a loss or estrangement of intimacy, and the psychologically corrosive effects (as she anticipates them) of nonmonogamy? What is STRAPON herself promising her partner in terms of restricting the emotional ramifications of the play parties--which will be pretty mind-blowing--if she goes to them? Will they just be sex for her? Leaving love as the preserve of her nesting relationship? Or will it be impossible for her to separate sex and feelings? Does she know herself?
Actually, I would not be sure that STRAPON is with her nesting partner, since she seems to speak of her partner slightly coolly--something like 'a perfectly good relationship'. Equally, it's plausible to me that someone who's just turned 30 wants to explore these kinks, even get them out her system, before settling down.
To me, she should speak more to her partner about her kinks and speak better. This doesn't mean spinning them so she can get what she wants to do past her lover. Nor does it presume any outcome--that she'll get to be group-pegged, or that she'll sacrifice getting pegged for her lover's sake. It does mean relieving herself of both embarrassment and wallowing in fantasy--the mindset that says these desires are purely fantastic; describing what she wants; and listening to how some (or the most extreme) version of what she wants may just be a no-go area if she wishes to remain in the relationship. All the same, with both the letters, my feeling is that there will always be a host of reasons not to do it, not to pursue your kink ('...but you've just had a child!'). And there will also be a heavenly host of people praising you for not doing it--e.g. 'you've been mature', 'you've been adult about it', 'you've been able to distinguish fantasy and reality'. (Maybe the heavenly host just don't have your desires; or their kink is pressuring you into conformity). But the person with these desires wants to enjoy them. And, in fact, there's always a way to pursue one's kink lovingly in a a relationship. Or almost always. Like, in STRAPON 's case, inviting her lover to the parties, or going to 'swinging' venues--supposing the term has currency in a US lesbian setting--but, to begin with, only making out with her partner.
There's nothing in STRAPON's letter about what the sex is like in her relationship. I think there are broadly three possibilities: that it's thin (or was better at an early stage of their being together); that it's satisfactory, but doesn't involve her gf pegging her; or that her gf already pleasurably pegs her, and said no to the group sex as a possessive or exclusive Domme. The last is perhaps least likely to me, in that we hear nothing of it at all.
My surmise would be that STRAPON is feeling a bit restive under the limited sex in what is shaping up to be a monogamous nesting relationship--but rather than expressing this and (perhaps) advocating for herself with her partner, has reached out in her mind for what is evidently a fantasy (the group-pegging by women). Actually going through with that would involve finding something like five lesbians who are into it--maybe initially strangers, so the experience is hot--and getting to know them, or someone vouching for them, well enough socially for the scene to be safe, negotiated and logistically feasible. Now, how imaginable is this in STRAPON and her partner's actual life? They may well know a lot of the out lesbians locally. They could live in a rural area.... Is it feasible? In saying 'swinging', STRAPON is saying lesbian swinging, right? She's not just diverting us and herself with the feminine gangbang, while entertaining much more common-or-garden thoughts of a grubby affair? A gay or straight affair? She has to what psychoanalysis calls (I know I have been anti- psychiatry, but I do know something about psychoanalysis...) 'traverse the fantasy': she has to start thinking and acting such that what she wants is attainable, is a real possibility, but isn't something she should do if it would involve hurting someone else. Being realistic about her fantasies would probably involve her first of all addressing the sex in her relationship.
@2 Fubar gives very good advice to both lw s.
@8. Bauhaus. Both correspondents are only thinking about it. They're where you are.
@16. JibeHo. I agree it would be a reason to put on the brakes if, with the confusion over identifying as straight or bi, she isn't clear whether she wants to participate or not.
@19. Griz. Good response to aeros taking the piss.
@22. Fantastic. 'Those folks' are possibly all, each and every, cuckquean(s). Or may be, if we take the guest expert seriously. No woman would cuck, perhaps, if she listened to you.
@24. Ensign. It's possible that the anxieties never go away for her and are an essential part of the excitement of cucking.
@28. JibeHo. Well, Fubar did not come up with the idea. I didn't find his thought out of place.
I thought Dan gave CCC a perfect answer and had nothing to add. My summary of the answer: successful cuckqueans feel cuck angst; cuck angst is not disqualifying; ... but don't do anything you don't want to do. Many people feel the right advice is 'you're not ready to cuck'; but I'm suspicious of this, because if cuck angst is so pervasive, among both men and women, how would any cuckx get started? My perception would be that soi-disant broad-minded people who can't identify with the cucking impulse (Fantastic was honest and explicit about this in the last thing she said), without disparaging the kink, are apt to find reasons to tell people why they shouldn't do it. They probably do this unconsciously. I'm not suggesting that anyone has been moralistic about cucking, or women cucking. But, once more, this is a question and a field where I trust the instinctive response of the guest expert more than that of some commenters.
JibeHo @28: The "Peg the Patriarchy" party retort was the polar opposite of "hot lesbian(s) performing for hetero males", and a dig at the stupid trope. I think that's glaringly obvious.
BiDanFan @34: I have it on good authority that the patriarchy does not desire to be pegged.
Ms Fan - I was staying in my lane in one respect and mostly in bed in another. There's a case one could make about "hot" as applied to activities versus people, but mainly I think I have absolutely no standing to imply that there exist in the world any non-hot lesbians. My judgement on the question is surely worthless beyond the most vague generalities. My original response was more along the line of feeling for LW2 and her not wanting to have to brand herself for life or prematurely abandon an otherwise worthwhile partner before testing out new activities. Now if you want to start a campaign to reserve the P activity for all-F participation only, well, it's not my place to have a position on it, but I may perhaps refer people to you.
M?? Harriet - Surely we can leave it to the lesbians to decide on the lack of merit of L stereotypes. You may have the standing to take a large part in the conversation about the P acivity, though.
I thought the question of LW1's orientation to be due to bad editing. Most plausible is that she called herself something like "a woman in a straight marriage" which an editor took as "a straight woman". I doubt many sincere and careful LWs would claim such a difference.
Sorry, Fubar @38-@39, I understand you were attempting to shut down Crazy Cat Dude's oh-so-trite lesbian objectification, but as a cishet man, your joke didn't land with us queer women. I think that's glaringly obvious. While Cara Delevigne's cheeky outfit initially seemed delightfully subversive, particularly to us Dan Savage readers, it was problematic in more than one way, namely: "First, why should an oppressive system of gender-based exploitation be blessed with some delightful ass play?"
I know PLENTY of men who'd love to attend an all-women pegging party as pegees. Your comment could be seen as encouraging them.
Venn @40, allowing STRAPON her women-only fantasy is hardly "reserving [pegging] for [women] only." I am the last person to argue that men, in general, shouldn't get pegged!
I agree that CCC's sexual orientation reversal was likely engineered by an editor who was smoking too much weed with Dan. Dan, if you could please clarify how CCC identified herself, that would be helpful.
fubar - I'm sorry to have singled you out. I took crazy cat dude's comment differently because he made it clear that as a guy (DAD), the fantasy of an all women pegging party exists solely in his imagination.
Harriet - while Venn can speak for himself, the issue that I thought Venn might have were he a gay woman rather than a gay man, would not be the issue of whether or not the female participants (or the activity) were hot, but rather that the women (gay or bi) would be performing for the benefit of male onlookers. The fetishization of lesbians by our culture is well established. I guess I just felt compelled to push back before the trickle of jokes became a deluge.
STRAPON - According to The Lily, there are only 21 lesbian bars left in the U.S. When I was a youngish lesbian in San Fran, I had a girlfriend there who participated in private parties where various sexual acts were demonstrated - the one that stands out vividly in my memory was a lesson on fisting. I never attended any of these gatherings, which by my understanding oftentimes led to some form or fashion of group sex. By the time I met my girlfriend she was out of that "scene".
In the days when lesbian bars were more plentiful, I would venture it would have been much easier to arrange some sort of group gathering. Feeling chemistry and building trust with another person would seem much easier to me to accomplish face to face than via meet up apps.
I have never participated in a munch, but perhaps there are some that are women only? If you don't live in a bigger city with an active lesbian community, you should do that now - while you're young...
BiDanFan @41: Thanks for the article link. I was aware that Cara Delevigne had misappropriated Luna Matatas’ trademark, but not that she’d misrepresented its message (and how ironic that was). I regret using the former’s definition of the term to try to make a point, and as penance, I shall order a Peg the Patriarchy® face mask from the latter.
JibeHo @43: No worries. My intent, like yours, was to push back, but it wasn’t my best work.
Except Harriet @37, in reference to LW1, as CMD @5 pointed out, the guest or Dan didn’t mention the baby which LW1 gave birth to a year ago, and how that might complicate the situation. Jealousy is a crazy emotion, similar to anger arising in how it does one’s head in.
Hopefully, LW1 & her husband keep in mind that their baby will absorb, at a critical time of growth which the first five years of life are, all the emotions swirling around them.
@40. Venn. I don't find the thought of being pegged by a gang of women hot myself. Too Bacchic. What was the lesbian stereotype? The idea of lesbian sex being hot to men is at best boring to lesbians, I think, but Fubar was citing or making fun of it. I think JibeHo just thought it a bad and stale topic for jokes. OK.
@41. Bi. Yes, I'd like to attend that party--but the dynamic has changed. It's sexually mixed or all-in, even if the only sexual activity is women-on-top pegging.
@46. Lava. I don't know why there's a coincidence between this happening now--with the cucking--and the birth of their child. Does she want less sex? With the labor of physically caring for her child? Quite possibly...--so that, in her husband's mind, more or a satisfactory amount of sex will have to be had with someone else? Is he resisting settling down and being tied to his family? Acting out and reaching for his youth? She doesn't have to go through with the cucking, and she should of course ask whether the timing is right. But she did present herself in the letter as majorly turned on by the idea of his fucking another woman; and if she's going to do it, it has to happen sometime.... There's always a good reason why it's too soon, or too late, or too uncomfortable, or just too challengingly anti-social.
@44. JibeHo. Christ. Soon there will be as few lesbian bars as abortion clinics, probably in the same compounds behind barbed wire.
I wouldn’t make too much of CCC defining herself as straight and later as bi. It may be editing as some have already touched on, or she may have meant “cis” by stating “straight” which I’ve seen happening in the past.
Her situation is indeed tricky, and it may be better to put that quckqueenness of hers aside for few years. Yet sometimes you realize it’s better to do so only after you actually try it. And when the time is ripe to do it again you already have a much better idea of what works, what you want and how to better accommodate others.
There’s a potential hefty price involved, and in CCC’s situation she should evaluate if it’s worth it, as her relationship with her husband and raising their baby together may be at stake, not to mention her own state of mind and self esteem
If all three cuck-inclined folks are secure enough to give it a try and dismiss it as an “oops” and move on if it doesn’t pan out the way they thought it will, it may be worth it. I know, much easier to say…
Lava @ 46
Thank you for the acknowledgement. It really stood out that the baby was totally overlooked in the official advice.
I find it interesting how the commentariat decides on a week by week basis (it seems) whether or not to take a letter writer’s words literally. Apparently, this week, Dan - or his staff - were so sloppy with their editing that (depending on the theory) they changed the original language in the letter from either “cis” to “straight” or equally incredible from “straight married” to “straight”.
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m pretty sure in 20 effing 21, Dan wouldn’t abide by such an egregious mischaracterization.
What happened to reading the letters as written? I thought that was the dogma here. Or does that only apply when the letter writers fit into our comfortable boxes? Asking for a friend.
@29 Correction: Aiiiiighhh!! Make that 66 comments from @3 to @69, not a numerically incorrect 63. I always did suck at Math.
By the way....we're getting closer to this week's luscious Lucky @69 Award.
Also, FWIW, I never expected Venn to actually dive into the fray and offer a good faith defense of my position. Although he and I are ostensibly on the same side, (SSers swimming against the same DS tide and all) we are presumably not equals in the fight, and therefore don’t owe one another the benefit of (offense intended) any attagirls.
I concede that the authors of Deuteronomy gave not one scintilla of a shit to the female half of the lying with others quotient of the SS equation. After all, women haven’t really “counted” since they replaced every Diana statue they could find with a Catholic church.
And it is clear that homophobia is at its most vitriolic and nihilistic when it comes to gay men. They are definitely the victors in the same sex martyrdom race. Lesbians are at best an afterthought and at worst a tantalizing fantasy.
So yeah. Venn and I aren’t even running in the same race. So I understand why he’s so desperate to extricate the G from the soup. I get it.
Hot is subjective and often situational.
CMD @48, good theory that CCC might have said "straight" when she meant "cis," or perhaps she meant she is in a straight marriage, or she's bi-curious (functionally straight), or who knows. As for their status as parents, I deferred to the parents of the board, but might this not mean putting off any kinks for 17 more years? It will be easier for them to realise this fantasy when they are younger and more attractive than if they wait until they are 50. Indeed, if this leads to a divorce, there could hardly be a worse time. But this is just a dinner where CCC can observe her husband flirting with another woman (and go home and fuck him senseless afterwards). Seems like a fairly low stakes way to investigate how this makes her feel, before anyone catches feelings or STIs.
Another good, possibly inadvertent, point. Why is it spelled cuckquean and not cuckQUEEN? Google says this:
"Quean is a notable word in its own right. It comes from Old English cwene, meaning ‘woman’, from Proto-Indo-European *gwen-, which is also the root of queen, misogyny, and gynaecology. In English, cwene was originally a neutral word; but like many terms of female reference, it gradually took on negative senses and connotations, coming to mean ‘impudent woman’, ‘hussy’, and ‘prostitute’."
Dan @52, how about "straight"? :) Always a treat when you pop into the comments! I agree that anyone someone is having sex with, and any sex acts they're enthusiastically engaging in, are "hot" to that person. I am happy to read all your past and future uses of the word "hot" in this sense.
Just re-read the original letter from CCC — in the first line, she describes herself as "a straight female." Several paragraphs later, she writes: "Am I there to watch or participate? (I’m bi, so it’s not out of the question)." She didn't describe her marriage as straight, but herself as straight. And then... "I'm bi." Perhaps she meant (and should've gone with) "straight-identified" at the start; or maybe, like a lot of straight people, she thinks of herself as a "little bit bi" or perhaps heteroflexible. But there was no editing error here!
Thanks for clarifying, Dan! Yeah, if she doesn't know whether she's straight or bi, she should figure that out before involving any third parties in her marriage.
@54 Dan the Man & @55 BiDanFan for the CCC WIN!
Agreed , seconded, and thirded. See my comment @30. :)
Harriet @47, These two had had sexy play re this then baby came then flirty texts from an old friend which the husband mentioned and then the LW said ‘oh why not take it further with this woman’. Both seem to be pushing this.
It seems weird to me that the baby is mentioned so casually. A one year old is still usually waking at night, still in nappies/ diapers, still at a very vulnerable age.
The best time to explore anything like this is when all are comfortable to do so & husband & wife have a clear plan if either start freaking out. The concern for me around the baby is don’t bring drama home so it dominates & baby’s needs become secondary.
Why now, for both of them. Is it opportunistic timing only ie flirty texts set the tone or a response to being tied down with a dependent.
Oh Dan, hi, you made an appearance on the last week of this format.
Can’t fathom what you are doing next week though, being tech challenged. Hope it’s easy to navigate.
@53 As a parent, I'd say an infant is a very different thing than, say, a ten year old. For one thing, the first while after giving birth is a very vulnerable time both physically and emotionally for the person who was pregnant. For another, an older child is logistically easier to, for instance, have stay at someone else's house overnight.
Babies are hard, and new parents already dealing with a lot. It's not unreasonable to say "You'll probably be able to handle all this better in a couple years". No need to defer all fun until the kids are adults, though.
"....since they replaced every Diana statue they could find with a Catholic church."
Thanks for today's spit-out-the-coffee moment.
As some have already noticed, not to mention by her own admission, LW is indeed a novice.
That said, is she being pegged by the gf? If so, she may have an edge in asking for an additional pegger or two.
Regardless, her strapon gang bang fantasy may take time to realize, yet just like CCC she shouldn’t give up on what tickles her fancy.
Kinky scenes for women-only do exist in some places yet can be elusive to find and join. LW may look into befriending some female kinksters and find out.
JibeHo @ 49, 51
Thanks for finding the orientation contradiction in CCC’s letter. The reason I don’t make a too big a deal out of it is because she may have misused a term or two, yet her intentions and where she stands are clear nevertheless.
I get where you come from as for the challenges of being a gay woman. We all have different backgrounds and struggles, and one only knows what they know when they know it. Yet strictly statistically speaking, most violent attacks on gay and trans are directed towards those assigned male at birth. Men, straight or closeted, see them as a threat or as a person who voluntarily shed their “male rights” hence deserve ridicule and humiliation.
Yes, some of it is also directed at gay women and trans men. There is this notion of “stealing our women” and “one good fuck by a man is all you really need.” Yet for reasons mentioned above some men may view them as “strong” for “choosing” to present as masculine.
Women in general are more accepting of gays and trans of any persuasion, and far less likely to be violent.
San Savage @ 54
Editing error or not, what really stands out is both you and the guest expert overlooking LW and hubby being parents of a one-year-old, which should have been mentioned and addressed by the officials.
Failing to do so is a disservice to LW and ammunition to those eager to discredit you. (Disclaimer: I may be a serial whiner yet have lots of appreciation for you regardless.)
CMD - If you read my comment closely you’d see that we are in complete agreement. Gay men and trans women are subjected to a much more intense level of homophobia. That was one of my central points.
The why of it is simple but perhaps counterintuitive - misogyny. Women simply aren’t considered as important as men. We are to be controlled where possible (the current assault on women’s reproductive freedoms is central to this), objectified, or dismissed as inconsequential.
I’m not bemoaning my fate as a gay woman. I’m a realist above all else - I know my team has it fairly good all in all.
I’m glad we are in agreement and apologize for taking my argument too far.
As for the current assault on women’s bodies, I agree that it is driven by misogyny and we’re in it together as it is an assault on all of us. I think the “conservative” rational goes something like: “First we gave women some rights, then the homos insisted on their own. Next thing we know gays and lesbians are getting married and god forbid even have children, and now this fad of trans and non-binaries.
If we only we put women back at their place everything will turn around to the way it used to be when real men ruled the land.”
Last week of this format? Huh?
Dan, something new is happening next week is what I meant. Your ‘heads up’, after the letters.
Format not the right word, then?
Sounds like the SavageLUBE browser extension won't be needed any more.
Sitting there, like a ripe cherry waiting to be plucked, the luscious @69. Who wants it?
@68 fubar: Thank you for so kindly setting up the luscious Lucky @69 for me again, fubar.
Although I lost my virginity three decades ago I humbly accept. :D
@69: WA-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! For the "SECNOD" week in a row Griz lands on the luscious Lucky @69 Award! I, Griz, shall bask in my newfound numerical glory while watching Rocky Horror Picture Show later this evening, tingling with antici......................PATION! :D
Ms Grizelda - Thank you; otherwise I'd have had to wait for tomorrow.
Mr Savage - It was easier to take the letter seriously assuming consistency on LW1's part, and there have been significant editing errors in the past, even some deliberate decisions that have quite altered the context. Given this clarification, I'll defer to Ms Fan.
Ms Jibe – I could hypothesize about how I might react as an L, but, comprehending little more about the difference between Ls and GWs than Elinor Dashwood did about what made men “beaux,” I should not want to commit myself.
I'll agree with a large or even majority strain of homophobia's at least running parallel to misogyny, but there is a strongly female-driven sort of anti-gay attitude that takes quite a different line, and in non-corporate situations I've experienced that brand more than the other, though doubtless others have had different histories.
If you don't object to a little serious non-barbed discussion, does your team want full custody of the G label? In other venues I keep seeing posters present under the G and then it can be difficult to tell how to interpret some things which are mentioned before gender and/or sex are clarified. Given that it's already bad enough how common the general G is, I'd be more than happy to set up camp under a new term, giving both team the advantage of presenting under a single and distinct letter (it's a pity D is already taken, or I could please Ms Cute by going back to Miss Mitford's term daisy).
Much deserved, auntie grizelda @69. The last and final @69 in the Savage Love commentary, as next week it will be hosted by Disqus, without numbers. We will have to adapt!
@71: vennominon: I guess you are among non-participants. Understood. I'm glad to see you back in the commentary. :)
@72 fubar: What?!? No more Dan Savage posting Savage Love?? I have been getting emails from Dan and The Stranger but I did not know about this. So Disqus is a new login comment system? Is Dan leaving The Stranger? :o ?
Well, I guess the Lucky Numbers game has been fun while it has managed to last over the years.
Thank you, fubar, Dan, BiDanFan, LavaGirl, fantastic_mrs_fox, and everyone for helping make it fun every week. :)
I finished my latest orchestral score to export from Finale to Logic tomorrow--just in time for Halloween. Griz is on to her late night treats! :D
@72 fubar: Oh there it is--I missed the heads up at the bottom of this week's Savage Love column. It sounds like I will need to create a new account via Disqus starting November 3, 2021. Fubar, thank you for the reminder.
Dan, thank you, too, for the heads up. Will you have a link that those of us with Stranger username accounts can access to create a Disqus account? I am among the Boomer dinosaurs who doesn't have a SmartPhone. I communicate online via my iMac.
@71 I also have noticed that 'gay' seems to have entirely replaced 'queer' as the umbrella term for not-straight, not-cis, with variations on LGBTIQA+ being used in formal contexts. The youths seem to say gay a lot. I used to do it too, it seemed sort of cooler, more vague and undefinable. But I've realised since then that bisexual is a fine word and I shouldn't be ashamed about it.
@53. Bi. 'Quean' predates 'wife' ('wif') in English and is more neutral and all-purpose. The forerunner of 'wife' was a Dutch word and roughly meant 'bitch'.
@52. Dan. By 'hot is subjective', you mean you find it hot? I think it's probably best to say 'hot' when a lw (maybe having to gear themselves up to do something) finds a scenario hot, and not when they don't. Sometimes when commenters call a scene hot, they're accused of levering themselves into it, maybe inappropriately e.g. a straight man perving on lesbians.
@57. Lava. I don't know whether couples (and this couple in particular) can keep their emotions to do with sex separate from their emotions to do with their home life, with raising their infant. Some couples have to be able to do it, or it's unlikely there would be any cuckold relationships. I would have thought the ordinary pattern is for a new parent's emotions to be one rolling mess--not to be separated out, so that e.g. a mother doting on her baby sees her partner with new respect as a breadwinner, but less passionately as a lover (just one example), or a new father's irritation at having cloth nappies drying in the kitchen colors his frustration at not getting it so much any more. In this case, he is the one who's come to her with the proposal, which is consistent with the 'man not getting it' stereotype, and she is of course--of course--well within her rights to tell him to 'slow down!' (or would be). But I think this is a situation where my instincts fall on the other side of the divide to yours. If you're going to cuck, you have to start sometime.... And I would suspect the people saying, roughly, 'don't start now--your emotions are all over the place as a young mother--you'll get in too deep too quick' might also say, in two years, e.g., 'when your child was preverbal, you could just have gone out for some fresh air while your partner hosted his lover. But now you'll have to explain why Daddy isn't coming to the park'.
When you are kinky, queer or in any way non-normative, there's always a good reason not to explore what you want. It requires constant self-assertion (and, probably, constant association with an identity group) not to self-suppress. Liberal cishets tend not to realise this. Their line is often, 'what's the problem? We're not bigoted'. But the normativity-enforcing line isn't even 'do you really want to do it?'. It's 'I know it's suburbia, but where else would the kids have space to run around?'.
@29 Griz on behalf of all under-represented numbers everywhere, as a majority number person enjoying privilege and recognizing with shame my culpability for number oppression, every number deserves recognition! Visibility counts! And I win Seventhy-Svenith! Privilege strikes again.
Just joking. I would even skip a week of awards randomly once in a while so more special, except FIRDT which is the most fun tradition and the only one Dan ever participated in. If I remember correctly, once he posted "first!", but someone beat him to it a few moments before! So actually his "first!" post was 2nd.
Ok Harriet @ 76, who even uses cloth nappies anymore & why would they be drying in the kitchen? No sun about? No dryer? My kids had them because disposables are expensive. Though when going out they were surely much easier. For all we know LW1 may have a nanny & parents just see baby for a few minutes each day.
Liberal cishets or other, babies are all the same and a one year old needs constant attention.
Confusing Grizelda re this new whatever that is coming up. I googled it & it makes no sense to me.
Congratulations on winning @69, may it being you
a ton of riches.
That’s ‘bring you a ton of riches. ‘
Griz @74, if you can use a Mac, you're not a boomer! :)
I am curious about the new comments format and if this is the end to numbered comments, wish them a fond farewell and congratulate the originator of the lucky numbers game, Auntie Grizelda, with the fitting final @69.
Wam @75, I agree, the kids these days have come full circle and are using "gay" to mean the same as queer, including bi, pan -- basically "not cishet." Good thing? Bad thing? Not sure. And the debate continues as to whether there is a substantive difference between bi and pan. For years this GenXer clung to the Bi flag, lately I seem to be capitulating to the idea that pan's a better, more inclusive word. Or I just want to fit in with the next generation, so much more clued up than my own! :)
@77 delta35: Many thanks for your positive feedback on the Lucky Numbers Game. If I recall, Dan did on one occasion land on the luscious Lucky @69 once as well as scoring FIRDT! honors in separate column threads. :)
@78 & @79 LavaGirl: Many thanks! For me it was a lucky landing. I hope I will be able to login to Disqus format when the time arrives. Sad to think that this is the end of the Lucky Numbers Game----unless someone technologically clever----fubar, curious2, perhaps?----knows a way to keep the weekly fun going under the new format. :)
@80 BiDanFan: Thank you for your supportive feedback. Actually, believe it or not, Dan the Man and I are among the youngest of the Boomer generation. Both of us are among others born in 1964, the Boomer "cut off" year (1965 is the first year of GenX through 1980). I must credit my computer skills to an older and wiser fellow Boomer tech friend. That said, there is still a lot about the latest technology that I am unfamiliar with, as yet. ;)
Griz @81, ah, so you are literally a baby Boomer! :)
@ Everybody: I hope you all will excuse the presumptuousness and theatricality of this post. But I always wonder about people who disappear from this forum for no discernable reason, and I wanted to make my departure an announced one. I’ve decided not to make the migration to the new “Disqus” platform for contributors that Dan recently announced. I’m terrible at shifting to new technological systems and devices (I still own an iPod). Besides, I must face the truth that I have little compelling to say about the central topic of this forum, especially in comparison to some of the high-flying sexonauts of Savageloveland. Accordingly, I think it would probably be better if I stepped aside and made space for others to further the conversation.
If someone had told me two years ago that I would end up joining this group, I’d have said they were crazy. I was a middle-aged person with a monotone sexual history who didn’t talk about sex with anybody in real life. I was buttoned up – all the way up. Getting here was an implausible leap. It was only possible at all due to a late-in-life crash course in sex. ed., a key component of which was reading Dan Savage and the commenters here. Once I did tentatively join in, you all welcomed me with tolerance, openness, and generosity – despite the fact that I didn’t really know what the hell I was talking about. I’m very grateful for all I have learned from you people.
And what have I learned? From Nocutename, EricaP, BiDanFan, and Allison Cummins I learned to broaden my definition of feminism. They also illuminated for me, through their personal stories, a wide array of preferences, proclivities and relationship models that I scarcely knew existed, all of which were rooted in a profound ethical foundation. Back then, I wouldn’t have connected the word “ethical” with some of the crazy shit I was reading about what people did in their bedrooms. But now I know better. Thanks, ladies.
From vennominon I learned that, although I am well-educated, there are people who have forgotten more about literature then I will ever learn – and I’ve been reading all my life. Also, that witty cultural references can be funny even when I don’t know the source points from which they spring. Also, that somebody can be “retired” and a still have a lot of insight into sex.
From Griz, I learned that a great movie can be as good a friend as some people – better even.
From Fubar, I learned that guys who kinda seem like assholes at first can turn out to be decent folks if you pay attention to what they’re actually trying to say.
And I learned so much more from dear departed members like Kim in Portland, Busy Quilting, EmmaLiz, Calliope Muse, and Tim Horton. I still think of these people and wonder what happened to them, and if they’re happy. If they are reading this, thank you, too.
So now I will step back into the digital cheap seats, whence I will continue to read and learn from all you wise, funny, sexy people. Goodbye, farewell and amen.
And good night, Mr. Roberts.
Pro tip: go to disqus.com and register now, rather than waiting until the new column is up.
@82 BiDanFan: Yep. And the best part is that, thanks to the U.S. Census Bureau I am officially in the same age group with my three older siblings, whether they like it or not. :D
@83 Ens. Pulver: You will be very sadly missed! I have enjoyed reading your comments and contributing what I can. Sending big parting hugs, positrons, and VW beeps! XO
For me, adding to the Savage Love comment thread has often been tricky, particularly in the weekly columns when I couldn't really relate to the LWs' situations. Sometimes what I would have posted was already said. So I didn't want to sound redundant.
I admit I am a bit hesitant about the shift to new Disqus technology, too, especially if it could possibly connect me to Twitter. :o
@84 fubar: Is Disqus a free login account? I have trouble with juggling and updating usernames and passwords, and suck at "Cut and Paste". If Disqus doesn't work out for me I will miss you, Dan, BiDanFan, nocutename, LavaGirl, Ens. Pulver, and fellow commenters posting on Savage Love tremendously! :* ( ?
M?? Harriet - I believe you are correct; you recall to mind What They Did to Princess Paragon, in which the forerunner-of-woke lesbian editor insisted that Princess Paragon's mother, the Queen of Iri (a matriarchal planet) would properly have been titled the Elder Crone.
Ms Fan - You seem quite as clued in as most of the rising generation, though I strongly approve of their continuing addition of more precise definitions.
M? Benger - Interesting. Not all that long ago, I recall a gay influencer making a serious attempt to get the rest of the G to join him in presenting as Q instead - far more inclusive, though too assimilationist for me. It reminded me of how, some weeks ago on the podcast, Mr Savage expressed the idea that the world would be a better place if everyone were attracted to everyone (or at least not unattracted to any particular group). That had a sort of Coca-Cola commercial sound to it, but on serious reflection I've always found having a microscopic dating pool to be one of my greatest advantages. The general G seems to go in and out of favour - I was quite in sympathy with Team B during the maddening discussions of "gay marriage"; I do suspect it's time for Team G to move on to a new and specific word; this one had a good long run.
We’ll sort it, Grizelda, us boomers/ white kangaroos are not done for yet. Though I’m starting to feel close.
Happy Halloween or is it Scary Halloween , to all.
Ens @83, I will miss you. You may not have had much experience of sexual deviancy (winkyface) but your posts were always thoughtful, insightful and empathetic. You have been an asset to this comments section. I'm glad you were able to learn from me! I take that as a sincere compliment. All the best to you, wherever you may find yourself.
Fubar @84, thanks, registered with the same username (BiDanFan). And the penny dropped that it's a misspelling of discuss, not discus! Doh!
Venn @86, thank you as well. I do try to learn from my youngers and find myself fitting in better with people around 10 years younger than me -- those who are on the cusp between GenX and millennials. I hope I can learn from the GenZers as well, though I dare say they could also learn a few things from someone like me. :)
@78. Lava. Lots of young people use cloth nappies in the same way they play boardgames and ration their social media. The nappies are drying in kitchens because these young folk live in big cities and have no outside space. This is how it is in e.g. NYC, London, and to an extent European capitals like Paris (or where I live, not a capital but a place with lots of white-collar jobs and an inflated housing market)--you can have two careers, get into your 30s, be in a stable relationship and still not have the money to buy anywhere with a yard, or private space, out the back.
I can accept that babies need constant attention. But this would be an argument against parents of newborns fucking (each other ... because Baby might cry...). Suppose that the amount of time the couple finds locating the 'bull' / 'unicorn' / 'slut' third, plus having sex, is the same as they spend having sex with each other and talking about parenting on Facebook or BUMP or the Wedding Bee or Mumsnet. (This may be unlikely, but still...). Would the same objection to the starting cucking now obtain?
Nooo, Harriet, as if parents don’t fuck because baby might cry especially when lots of western parents put baby in another room.
Fair enough point re people in cities, though most would have a verandah / patio, hang the nappies out there. Best to get some sun on nappies.
Point is the emotions, can this LW & husband do this & not overwhelm with the emotions which arise & keep family life steady.
You can’t be serious thinking time spent on fb or their own sexual life, is the issue here. Baby @ one still sleeps a lot, though teething can bring many sleepless nights & they may just have started walking.
If these two had already opened their relationship prior to baby then the hard emotional work would already have been done.
Weekend is over & wouldn’t it be great if LW jumped on & told us re this woman’s visit. Given this woman is an out of towner, that could be a good thing if any action occurred. A discrete experience, then our LW & husband check in with each other how it has impacted them, before any repeat.
@87 LavaGirl: Agreed and seconded, Aussie sister! I'm not done yet, either.. although some days are easier than others. I still have stories to tell. That's one of the biggest benefits of my being an auntie. Musical instruments do the storytelling.
By the way, what did you think of my latest Stephen King novel-based mp3 soundtrack out in time for Halloween?
Spooky music, Grizelda, love the symbols. You are a talented composer & musician.
griz @85: Disqus is indeed a free login account. Go to disqus.com and click "Get Started" to register. If you have trouble, you can always email me :)
I'm enjoying your piece "Tail Spin" this evening. Well done!
@90. Lava. In a city like London, Paris, Barcelona, the old class divide is essentially now an age divide. Without money from parents (and we're talking only 15-20% of sub-30 to 35yo s), young professionals do not have enough money to buy somewhere with a back yard. You saw this with the pandemic: the metropolitan elite escaped to second homes in the country, and many were stuck in flats, plus a once-a-day slog round the local park. People's experiences were entirely dissimilar, and the have-nots on the bottom felt it politically.
I don't know the answer to the question of whether the lw and her husband could cope emotionally with opening their relationship. I think you're finding it hard to get your head around the desire to cuck (which is something essentially ambivalent).
Jesus Harriet, you don’t stop! I don’t have to get my head around anything, here. It’s the LW which has decades left to parent & is she willing to risk? Not sure if you’ve tried to parent with a man, but I have & it’s flamin’ hard. Both the parenting & doing it with a man, as a woman. It’s a long term role/ job, & if she’s secure in her relationship then no problemo.
‘Who’ has decades left to parent…
Nearly @ hunsky, Grizelda!
You’d think Dan would have given us a bit more than one week to leave our numbers game. Geez. Some people.
Thanks for the heads up, fubar. I think I’ve got on board.
London, Paris, Barcelona, Sunshine Coast.
I live in a country where our First Nations’ Peoples, sang with the Land. Imagine how it would be now if the invading white people had stopped, showed respect & learnt from them. Amazing people. Sixty- Eighty thousand years, they moved around this land. And built only what they lived in. Art everywhere.
I did look up boomers on Aussie slang, Grizelda. It’s male boomerangs! Given I’m no longer fertile, I experience myself as middle ground, re gender.
Boomerangs. That was a wild slip.
Before addressing Venn @71, I wanted to chime in on the use of the word pegging in the context of women using strap-ons with other women. Unless you are penetrating the other woman anally, it's simply called fucking. In my experience, pegging (anally penetrating another woman with a strap-on) is not on the printed menu of lesbian sexual activities. I think language matters here, so I wanted to point out that the LW didn't mention pegging in her letter, and I don't think we should dilute the meaning of pegging as it was originally conceived.
Regarding the question of whether my "team" wants "full custody of the G label" I've done sort of a deep dive on the etymology of the word gay. Wikipedia has a rather good summary of the evolution of the term, although I also read a half dozen other articles tracing its history.
The consensus seems to be that the term first acquired association with loose morals (prostitutes, brothels, lotharios) over 300 years ago. The term wasn't specifically associated with homosexuality until the last 100 years, and again, the consensus is that the definition encompasses all homosexuals generally, and gay men specifically. There is an argument made that Gertrude Stein's 1922 book - Miss Furr & Miss Skeene - was the first published use of the term to specifically reference a homosexual relationship. The two Misses in her book were women who lived together exclusively for most of their lives - they were gay gay gay!
Whether I use the term lesbian, or gay, or gay woman, to describe myself is largely a matter of context. If I am meeting someone face to face, I prefer the term gay, as my gender is fairly obvious, the term itself sounds better than lesbian - which has always had a leaden and unwanted sort of politicized quality to it in my mind - and I've never encountered any pushback on my "right" to use the term with anyone I've met - including gay men. (Perhaps they are just being polite?!)
On the internet, if people aren't familiar with me, and therefore don't know my gender, I will use either gay woman (which I greatly prefer) or lesbian to describe myself. It depends on the audience, and to be perfectly frank, I am reticent to use the "G label" on this board simply because its clear that it offends you when I do.
If you are looking for a word that exclusively refers to male homosexuality, perhaps take a page out of the Lesbos playbook and use an ancient Greek term that is generally associated with male homosexuality in the same way that Sappho is associated with Lesbians. The best I could come up with is Thebans - for the name of the legendary troop of the Greek army (Sacred Band of Thebans) made up entirely of 150 gay male couples. Of course that would cause a problem with the other "T" word in the alphabet... So perhaps use the name of the creator of the Sacred Band (according to Plutarch) - Gorgidas.
Gorgidasians? Gorgidans? That would preserve the "G"!
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