Regarding my advice for POLY...
1. You can sign up for Tinder premium to set your visibility to only people you've swiped on. This will give the couple the availability to see who's out there and potentially connect, while swiping left on anyone they may know. Those who get swept to the left (to the left) never see your profile.
2. I'm a Bi guy in a relationship with an evangelical lady who was fired from her seminary job when she got pregnant out of wedlock, so discrimination is real.
3. I sympathize with this dude, because I too would love to be in a triad relationship, but with a kid and an Evangelical lady, it's just not in my cards in the foreseeable future. But if this couple managed to find their male unicorn and enter a LTR throuple with him, how are they going to hide that from their community without being very shitty to their third?
I read your response to the bi-male whose wife works for a church and makes them cautious about their exploration of poly due to his wife's job. Now, unless there was something in the letter that you didn't print, your tirade was unjustified, petty, and hypocritical. Once again, your personal dislike for religion colors the advice you gave.
The writer did not say his wife worked for an evangelical CHURCH. It said he was concerned about backlash from "evangelical assholes." Your response makes several assumptions not reflected in the letter you printed. You do not know for sure the church the wife works for is evangelical or even if the management of said church is intolerant. Furthermore, by putting in ministry in quotes, you demean and devalue her role, simply because you were triggered by one mention of the word evangelicals. And then your statement about not being a bigot because you know some cool kinky church folks, so that eliminates your bigotry is no different than someone saying they are not racist because they said hi to a black person once.
Dan, your response was completely and totally fucked up. As an ordained minister myself and former pastor, I get how the church can be fucked up. But I also understand that even within a church, the people there can be as varied as any other group. When I was a pastor, while I was in a somewhat liberal denomination, I had individuals who could be considered evangelical and I had battles with them constantly. They were not representative of me or the church I pastored. So you made a huge assumption. To go on a tirade simply because the wife is committed to performing ministry and is worried about evangelicals, not knowing who or what those evangelicals are was really petty and shallow.
I get you have problems with the church, given your upbringing, and that is your right. But just as you don't want all gay people lumped into one bag, you really need to cut the shit with always going in on folks when you don't have the full evidence to do so—UNLESS there was a portion of the letter that you didn't print that justified your rant. Your response was way out of line and it just shows your own hypocrisy. You advocate all the time for equal treatment and for valuing people as individuals—unless they are in the church. Then you become a rabid idiot just like a lot of other hypocritical idiots who don't realize they sound exactly like the people they are railing again. Seriously Dan, you can and need to do better. Sign me...
A Poly, Kinky Minister Who Curses And Is Tried Of Your Shit
Well, I was under the influence, as I noted toward the end of my response. And in my defense, APKMWCAITOYS, POLY described his wife as being "in ministry," which I put in quotes because I was quoting him (it's an odd turn of phrase; she's not a minister, she's in ministry?). He added that she "works for a church" and that there are "evangelicals all around" them—evangelicals with the power, it seems, to end his wife's career. I inferred from all of that info that Mrs. POLY isn't working for the UUA. Perhaps I was too harsh—it does happen—but I did wind give POLY some useful advice. More actual and, IMHO, useful advice than I intended to give POLY when I began my response. Perhaps POLY could take the good from my response to heart while ignoring the bad—kinda like liberal ministers are always telling us to do with the bible?
About that gland...
Just a quick note about your use of the term "Cowper's gland" in the recent Savage Love. As you either probably know, or would be unsurprised to find out, the term "Cowper's Gland" is an eponym, named after William Cowper, English anatomist and surgeon. There is a push within the anatomical sciences to replace eponyms with more anatomically-based terms (i.e., bulbourtheral gland). I think this is principally for two reasons: 1. Eponyms do not provide any information about the structure/location/function of the anatomy (e.g., Where is the Pouch of Douglas? What does it do?), and 2. Equally, if not more, important is that these structures are invariably named after old, dead, European men (or men of European ancestry), who were (statistically speaking) likely to have identified as cis and hetero.
I am sure you know that attracting individuals to science from groups traditionally underrepresented in STEM fields is a problem (as it is in virtually all parts of our culture/society). It is at least as bad, if not worse, in anatomy compared to other areas of science. There is growing opinion (among a younger generation of anatomists) that continuing to use eponyms perpetuates these European men as the "heroes" of anatomy and may contribute to the continued disenfranchisement of anyone that is not in that demographic. Are eponyms the main problem? By no means. Is it an easy thing to change that might help a bit? For sure. Also, anatomists principally teach medical, nursing, and allied health students, and our health care system needs (among other things) practitioners from underrepresented groups. Obviously your reach is much broader than any one anatomist, so I hoped you might pick up this torch.
Other common eponyms with their anatomical terms:
Fallopian tube (uterine tube): Gabriello Fallopio, Italian anatomist and physician
Pouch of Douglas (rectouterine pouch): James Douglas, Scottish physician and anatomist
Circle of Willis (cerebral arterial circle): Thomas Willis, English physician
Schlemm's canal (scleral venous sinus): Friedrich Schlemm, German anatomist
This first two are particularly awful since they are anatomical structures only present in typical female anatomy, but that are named after men! Anyway, I hope it is something you'll consider. Thanks for everything you do.
Adam D. Sylvester, PhD
Center for Functional Anatomy and Evolution
The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Consider it considered, Dr. Sylvester, and thanks for writing.
Regarding CHURN, the cuck whose wife stopped cucking him once they had kids...
What continues to irk me about CHURN is how he's intent on blaming his wife, when it was he who failed to do his due diligence as a kink-haver. Even a modicum of research would have shown him what Dan already knew: that women with young children are unlikely to want to pursue casual sex for the reasons outlined, and though some are, there's no way of knowing ahead of time how you'll feel. So if his absolute priority in a relationship was uninterrupted cuckolding, it was his responsibility to elect never to have kids — and to make that clear early on when dating someone. Of course that doesn't do him any good now, but it's imperative that he understands how he's to blame, accept that his primary responsibility now is his kids, and go from there.
I really blew it this time:
I’m a 31 year old female who is bisexual and I was I underwhelmed by your response to COCK in your latest "Quickies" column. COCK asked: "What benefit does a cock sucker get out of the deal?" Omg. For me, and hopefully for other suckers everywhere a cock in your mouth provides a sort of oral stimulation that is simply unparalleled. It's the taste, the smell, the texture, the wetness, the moans, the cum - everything! It makes my lips feel turned on. I am shocked when my female friends confide they won't even do it "for his birthday" but I try to remember different strokes for different folks...
Did one of my readers manage to destroy his cock forever?
No, because he is not immortal, it destroyed his dick for just the next few decades.
But please remind him that his dick will inevitably become food for worms or fuel for the pyre.
Anyway have a nice day :)
— LannisterStark (@LanisterStarkAr) July 16, 2019
Not everyone wants to fuck the porn stars they're watching fuck:
You asked if "people routinely choose to watch porn—do people ever choose to watch porn—featuring performers they don't wanna fuck?" Yes! Of course! It's often the act that we enjoy, not necessarily the people doing it. And then there's the whole issue of voyeurism: that some people would be happier watching that doing anyway. Keep up the otherwise good work, Dan!
To everyone out there who thinks I glorify open relationships, I offer this letter that came in response to a short, factual mention of ED meds in a recent column...
In your response to PSA about ED drugs this week: You really missed the point! Today's religious societies (of any sort) pretty much force human beings into pairs. Originally male-female, but in more modern times, others types are accepted. There were many reasons for this—reproduction to increase the workforce a big one historically, control is another—but the bottom line is this practice totally obscures the underlying fact that sexuality is NOT emotional! It's a response to physical stimuli! There is absolutely NO reason that ANYONE should suffer from ED! Once rising above the societal dictates, it will become obvious that performing for a partner WILL become routine, and, as a relationship starts aging, that emotional arousal will fail to excite physically. Engaging in a kink, puppy pile, or, my favorite, a creampie will do the job MUCH better than any drug. So before starting on drugs we should treat the underlying problem: wrap your mind around the fact that sex is physical, not emotional! Sure, it's great when you can hug your partner and get aroused, but that WILL fade over time! And that is totally normal! Figure out what DOES excite you physically—porn, fetish, extra partner, etc.—instead of going to a doctor who will just reinforcing the standard societal doctrines!
Heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, MS, treatments for prostate cancer—there are a lot of reasons why people develop ED. I'm sure boredom is one of them, sure, but it's not the only one and cream pies, while delicious, aren't a universal cure.
The Savage Lovecast: lovingly providing listeners with awkward moments since 2008...
That awkward moment when you don't realize it's your response call that was chosen for @fakedansavage's Savage Lovecast. I guess I hate my voice so much I don't recognize it lol
— Tim (@Huynhdows98) July 15, 2019
Okay, we're going to leave it there! Have a great weekend, everybody, and we'll see you Monday. And about this...
...I'm so looking forward to getting stoned out of my mind and going to see CATS. I can't be the only one. I mean, I hate CATS. I reject Andrew Lloyd Weber and all his works. (Evita too.) But still. I'm so there.