SL Letter of the Day: Back In The Saddleback


How do Christians convince themselves that anal sex isn't sex, but that gays are going to hell because they have anal sex?
SO FRUSTRATING: You know she's not going to call him out on his bullshit. If she's that concerned about anal and still considering doing it just to make him happy (and if, as it sounds, she's discussing her concerns with you INSTEAD of with him), she's a spineless lost cause. Ovary up, sister!
Dan, does Terry appreciate how diligently you've been guarding his virginity all these years?

As for DWACD, yes, anal is sex. Yes, you still need to use a condom, yes, your "friend" is an idiot. What he is NOT, is a virgin, if he has had anal sex before. He needs to quit being a hypocrite, and either totally abstain, because THE BIBLE, or quit pretending that he is "saving himself" for marriage.
If there are any other pretty, young Christian men out there worried about their virginity, I'd be more than happy to help them preserve it.
Sigh...y'know, it seems like there is a lot more to consider with anal sex and I think it should be a double loss of virginity. Who do I see about this? Is there a minister of virginity who writes the laws and regulations? Probably not worth the effort though...some lobby group will come along with their Big Anal money and have it amended so that the man in straight anal sex actually regains their virginity (if previously lost...)
The Big Anal Co. Fun Fact: "Only vaginas can destroy virginity."
@1: Pretty much anything a married man and woman do in the privacy of their own bedroom isn't a sin, because it is (supposedly) an adjunct to a procreative relationship. (Never mind the fact that a man hasn't gotten a woman pregnant with a scuba diving suit or a riding crop since the dawn of humanity, some six thousand years ago, and as far as we can tell, never will.) The exact same activities done by a non-married couple will land them in hell, despite the fact that the non-married couple is 100% as procreatively capable as the married couple. The exact same activities will also land a homosexual couple, married or not, in hell, regardless of the fact that they may be raising the discarded procreative adjunct of a heterosexual relationship.

Yes, I have heard this line of reasoning used in all earnestness by a Christian apologist.
Doesn't this young christian fellow know that the properly christian way to have sex is with someone to whom one is not attracted, preferably someone who does not even fit one's orientation?
So, he's a male friend, not her boyfriend, he thinks anal sex isn't sex, and he wants to fuck her in the ass, and she's uncomfortable with the idea, but considering it.

What is the letter writer getting out of all of this? Other than fucked in the ass by a guy who is clearly just defining things away to the point where he can get laid sin-free, guilt-free and string-free.

The letter writer really should stop and consider her relationship with this guy, what she wants from it and what he wants from it. If she just wants to corrupt and defile the nice young Christian boy, then go for it.

Otherwise, she should stop now before she gets hurt (or hurt more)

Also, whatever happened to the golden rule: Never touch a religious freak's dick.

Because virginity isn't a physical condition, it's hard to say who's right and wrong about it. Mr. Savage thinks that anal sex and oral sex "count" toward not being a virgin, but this is no more or less arbitrary than DWAC's boyfriend's belief that they do not. This isn't something we can measure or test. (Though said BF's reasons for believing this could stand some exposure to the conservative Christian idea that sexual ACTIVITY not meant to result in procreation is what's considered a sin, not just sexual intercourse)

I would say that someone who has had sexual experiences other than sexual intercourse is a "technical virgin."
What I want to know is, when these kids eventually get married, are they planning on telling their spouses that they are virgins, but leave out the part where they were having buttsex? If I had actually saved myself for marriage and my wife waited til after our honeymoon to say, "I'm glad I only let those other guys fuck my ass," I'd be pretty upset.
It clearly states in Deuteronomy 4:93: Thou shalt not have sexual intercourse with a woman's lady parts before making thy vows of holy matrimony. The ass is free game however, and the Lord our God sayeth, "Thy virginity shall be spared if you put one in the brown." Also, no masturbating.
The optimist in me can't help but think:

"How hot must this guy be that she's even considering this."
Don't fuck your "friend", and you should avoid his jerk ass for even trying to pull this on you.
@10, so as a gold star lesbian, I'm a technical virgin? Please.

Maybe the definition of virginity is arbitrary, but it has to at least be logically consistent.
This would be a great time to pull the "ole switcheroo" on the guy: "So if it's not sex, let me get a strap on and do you first, ok big fella? Hey -- NOT SEX!"
@6: And waste WORRRRRRLDS!
The Ultimate Guide to Anal Sex for Women

Is that any good for guys?
I stopped reading at "doing the chili dog". It's as bad as a lady calling her pussy or vagina her "boo-boo"
"Chili dog?"

Never mind, I don't want to know what stupid slang the dick-and-fart joke crowd created.
In what possible universe is Anal third base? It's at least, like, sixth base.

Enterprising "virgins" like this douchebag are no doubt even now combing through hour after hour of pornography (for research purposes, naturally) trying to identify sex acts that do not involve vaginal penetration. "I'm saving myself for marriage, so let's just do bukakke instead, okay?"
Suckin on chilli dogs outside the tastee freeze....
@10: It's not that arbitrary. "Sexual intercourse", as you put it, isn't just thing A in slot B. You can look the word intercourse up; the dictionary defines it as physical sexual contact between two people that involves the genitalia of at least one person. The same super handy book defines a virgin as someone who has not had sexual intercourse*.

Ergo, if you had anal, you're not a virgin. It's not arbitrary at all, it's totally bitrary. (although now I'm worried that I lost my v-card** after my first handjob and now I'm going to hell)

*It also defines virgin as an unmarried woman, so do with that what you will.

**Yeah, I said v-card, fuck off.
Dan, is there a version of that book for gay dudes? I have a, uh, friend would could use it.
@24 in the handbook I got in junior high, anything involving hands & genitals was third base. (First: kissing; second: tits.) Oral was this weird zone that didn't count towards "sex," almost as if it came from a whole different ball game.
@17 yes, truly said. That's why it's more important than ever that we outlaw the carrying of concealed vaginas.
NO NO NO! Wrong advice! She should definitely agree to this nonsex with him.

After he lets her have nonsex with using the strap-on and lube of her choice.
I think the LW should have anal with the guy, but make sure that she does shit on him. Don't you all think he deserves it?
Let me guess, bored preteen who watches too much South Park.
For those asking for the "for men" version of that book:
Anyone hungry after reading that?

Oops, missed your comment, which beat me to the obvious.
@24 The word has multiple possible meanings, which can either limit the meaning to only PIV sex or can include a broader set of activities. The definition of virgin as a woman who hasn't had a penis in her vagina is logical if your primary consideration is whether any children she has were fathered by her husband.

That said, I agree with the conclusion that an anal doesn't count is messed up, especially since the modern focus of conservative Christians on virginity stems from some concept of purity. This is what happens when the extent of your sex ed is "Don't have sex until marriage" and teens are left on their own to figure out the boundaries of sex.

You beat me to the comment by only a few minutes, but I was going to say the same thing. He SO does deserves it. I find the whole concept of preserving vaginal virginity AND status by proceeding to use other orifices dishonest (to say the least).
Don't put it in there! The Devil is in there! You don't want to touch the Devil with your dick! Do you?
Any argument for anal preserving "virginity" Should only apply to the bottom. If the thing is about baby making' [not STIs, ethics, an angry Nobodaddy, etc.] I.e. if _she_ wanted to save herself for marriage so as not to get knocked up, she could request that she take it in the butt.

He, OTOH, is a douche. if he is trying to not make baby Jebus cry...well, he's a douche.

Side note: would he still be a virgin if he fucked sheep instead? I mean in the butt, of course.
They convince themselves it's not sex by not using condoms or lube. Or at least that's my guess how the idiots would convince their stupid minds that it isn't sex.

Hey DWACD, ask your boyfriend how much "not sex" he's had, and how much with condoms, and then insist on STD testing before doing *anything* with him including kissing.
@ 35 To say the least, indeed. But hey, that's "christians" for you.
What's the deal tossing the question over to a book people have to buy? Isn't this a sex advice column?
Can we do away with food references in regard to sex and all its manifestations please? Come to think of it, I don't know whats nastier - a dick with shit all over it or an actual chili dog...but still, it puts a damper on dinnertime.
If this guy is a teen, and is now trying to overcome almost 20 years of Sunday sermons ringing in his ears, and his parents' approval and such, yeah, he may be conflicted about his desires and what he has been told is the right life. So this sort of silliness would be him trying to find his way towards a life he would rather have, rather than the one others would seek to impose. Along the way, he will have half steps and some odd beliefs, like pre-marital anal sex is okay but not vaginal intercourse. After he moves on in life, and gets independence, he would, in that situation, likely look back on this transitional sex stuff as silly.

But if that is case, then this sounds like gay people in their teens. Now, now, c'mon. Admit it. How many of you people knew gays who, in the process of going from 17 to 24 did some pretty dumb stuff and held some silly beliefs about their sexual lives, as they tried to shed 20 years of sermons and the disapproval of parents? And how many of them now just laugh and cop to it as their transitional steps from what they thought they were supposed to be into what they are and were?

In short, if he was doing the exact same weird belief system dodges, BUT WAS GAY, how many of you same Rev. Cotton Mathers of the left would be encouraging him to find it in himself to accept who he is etc., etc.? Ease up. Sounds like the guy is a teen horndog who is in the closet about being a teen horndog. If any group should sympathize, it should be this crowd.

Now, if he is out there waving placards about gays going to hell, and sodomites burning for eternity, yeah, his story takes on a darker twist. But let's not assume that.
While I agree with you about all this, Dan, wouldn't you also agree that this is just a matter of semantics? It's hard to understand others' motivations and perspectives if you don't acknowledge that they're just using different words.

"Anal sex" is not "sex" to this fellow; it's not what is sacred or marks an individual's journey out of "virginity". His penis passing into a woman's vagina is what matters, however incomprehensible this might be to the more reasonable person. It's a symbolic, or maybe spiritual distinction, but not one that's necessarily insignificant to that person's life. It's a variance in where that line falls in the still grey area of how we label things.

I know it's easiest to answer these questions when you have your lexicon set in stone, and it's nicest to approach things from the perspective of those of us who have signed on to your savage love glossary, but, in meaningful ways, the world is a little more complex. Just a suggestion.
The thing about saddlebacking is, guys get used to it. It's tighter and a bit more stimulating "back there." But many women want nothing to do with it, which can send boyfriend on the down-low. Heh, heh, heh.
I am really disappointed that not one person that has mentioned that the scenario she has described is very much not a chili dog. if memory serves, she's worried about a rusty trombone, just without the oral contact (please don't have the oral contact).

a chili dog involves...never mind. just forget it. this guy's an asshole and she shouldn't let him near hers.
He sounds like a good friend... FOR YOU TO POOP ON!
Mr Snow - It's one thing to believe and do silly things out of innocence and/or ignorance, and quite another to be a budding Rule Shark. He's not necessarily anti-gay, but he manifests the sort of unpleasant thought pattern likely to coincide with being so. I might hope he gets out of it, and perhaps he's the one who should be given some pertinent books, but, until he demonstrated a bit of progress in his conduct and character, I should not advise anyone I liked to give boinking serious consideration.

On the other hand, he and the LW seem perfect together, if we can just keep them in a very long engagement...


I doubt you'd find a gay teen, working to overcome years of Sunday sermons and conflicted about his own desires and making slow and tentative progress out of the closet who could convince a boyfriend to have anal sex and not think of it as sex.

Maybe he could do some serious mental gymnastics and not think of it as gay somehow, but, yeah, he'd think of it as sex.

I have no problem with them declaring that they want to save vaginal intercourse for a future relationship for any number of reasons. But deciding it isn't sex isn't a valid one.
I think you should show up with a strap-on.

"What, this is what you wanted, right? You lose your virginity when your dick goes in someone else's orifice. Your orifices don't count. Isn't that how this works?"
Stop rewarding/validating shitty behavior and repressive, bass-ackwards worldviews by fucking guys like this! Stop it!
47, "He's not necessarily anti-gay, but he manifests the sort of unpleasant thought pattern likely to coincide with being so...."

You realize you are making all that up about him being a rule shark, etc., right? Not in evidence, as my lawyer buddies would note.
DWACD should never, never, never have sex with this guy for so very many reasons. But the main reason that he doesn't deserve to have sex with her is b/c he has a madonna/whore complex. He wants to do the dirty not-really-sex thing that isn't good enough for the girl he wants to marry, yet somehow is good enough for DWACD. He's the kind of dude who sees women as either whores or virgins...and lucky you, DWACD- he's decided that you are just the kind of whore who would probably like to do dirty sex tricks for him. Read: major red flag. Anyone who sees consensual sex as dirty and wrong has serious problems. Avoid him like the plague and find a nice normal guy who can understand that women are capable of being both sexual and respectable at the same damned time.
Mr Snow - No; he had the classic Rule Shark reaction. He didn't try to understand anything about the spirit or the purppose of the rule; he just winnowed the exact definition into something around which he could work.

This may be an admirable quality in one's tax accountant, but that's about all.
Mr Snow - No; he had the classic Rule Shark reaction. He didn't try to understand anything about the spirit or the purppose of the rule; he just winnowed the exact definition into something around which he could work.

This may be an admirable quality in one's tax accountant, but that's about all.
Have you checked in on how your fav homo-retailer is doing?

JC Penny stock peaked at over $43 a share in February.
Currently it is $21.

The old CEO bailed yesterday.
The new CEO, Ron Johnson, blames Penny's problems on its marketing.

maybe they haven't featured enough gay dads in their advertising?

couldn't you be a darling and run out and buy some more of those dingy Tshirts you so love?


Back in February,
the department store chain faced criticism
from the American Family Association's One Million Moms project
for its hiring of Ellen DeGeneres to be the company's new spokesfaggot.

Back in February.
When the stock was at $43.
instead of $21......

In a direct response to the boycott campaign of One Million Moms,
JCPenney ran a Father's Day ad featuring a same-sex couple.

and very trendy.....

Danny gushed and slobbered about it on Slog on May 31.

His exact words were: "Well done, JCPenney. Suck it, haters."

Well Done, Indeed!

One Million Moms say, "Suck It Yourself, Danny......"