I am a 22-year-old female with a wonderful, caring 21-year-old boyfriend. I've slept with more people, but none of my long-term relationships have lasted as long as his single previous relationship. We've been dating for nine months. I've felt very grounded and secure in our relationship and ready to try new things with him - until yesterday.
We were discussing a new fantasy of his: bondage. I mentioned that this would be the first time I had deviated from normal hetero oral or vaginal penetration. He said he was not entirely in the same boat, and told me he had had anal sex with his ex-girlfriend. I was shocked. I can't really put my finger on why I'm upset. It can't be the actual act, because I was considering trying it with him. The best I can figure out is that I feel betrayed. We had the experience level conversation when we started dating, and it seems to me that would have been a good time to bring this up.
Am I right to feel misled? The bondage idea, which sounded like fun before, now just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. My boyfriend says he doesn't understand what has changed.
- Bondage Interrupted
Ask yourself this, BI: If your boyfriend had said 'Oh, yeah, I did anal with the ex -- I fucked her ass tons of times!' during that early 'experience level' conversation, wouldn't it have made him seem a little scary? A tad sexually intimidating? And wouldn't knowing that he had already done anal with his ex make you feel like you had to do it, too -- and do it soon -- to keep his interest? And wouldn't that have made you feel pressured to do anal before you were ready?
Instead of rubbing his anal experiences in your face, as it were, he let you get to know him first. He let you see that he was wonderful and caring, safe and patient, and then gave you the, er, whole story. Was he deceitful? I suppose so, but early 'experience level' conversations aren't depositions -- Christ, if they were we'd all be perjurers. Sometimes trust has to be built and trustworthiness demonstrated before someone feels secure enough to reveal everything.
Now, stop being a dick about this and tie that boy up already!
I am a straight 26-year-old male with a sexy, adventurous girlfriend. She is my sixth sexual partner and I am her first. From innocent Christian schoolgirl beginnings, she has followed me into bondage, water sports and strip clubs and even indulges my mild sadism! At first she was firmly against the idea of sharing me. Then she told me she'd changed her mind. She's always been attracted to women, and she mentioned some women we may want to ask to have a three-way with us. I was overjoyed - what straight man wouldn't be?
During this same discussion she mentioned that she wasn't sure it would be a good idea for her to commit to never having sex with another man - after all, she's only been with me. I told her that it sounded okay, but since I'm not really into MMF threesomes, she would be on her own. But when I asked if I could fuck other women without her being there, she said no! If she can fuck men without my presence, why can't I fuck women without hers? Isn't this a complete double standard?
- Fair Is Fair
She wants to have FFM three-ways because she's attracted to women, FIF, but there's something in it for you, too. Not only do you get to participate, but your participation also gives you veto power over the women your girlfriend messes around with. Since those FFM three-ways can't happen without you, they can't happen with women you find threatening or don't approve of. But if you sleep with other women without her around, she doesn't get a veto.
As for other men, FIF, the reason she 'gets' to fuck other guys without you there -- big, brave, kinky, experienced, sadistic you -- is because you have some sort of stupid hang-up about MMF three-ways. There's no double standard: she's perfectly willing to watch you fuck around with another woman. You, on the other hand, are not willing to watch her mess around with another guy. (You're not required to touch the other guy in a MMF threesome.) If you can't go there, if you're terrified of being in the same room with another naked man, then she's not choosing to be alone with that other guy -- you're imposing that choice on her.
As a faithful reader of your column, I respect the power you have to do for Stephen Harper what you did for Rick Santorum. As far as I know there isn't a descriptor for this yet. Harper (har-pur): loose pubic hairs that on occasion trigger the gag reflex of oral-sex performers, e.g., My boyfriend really needs to trim his bag, I got three harpers last night when I was blowing him. I feel this accurately personifies our current prime minister; something that ruins a pleasant event by sticking in your gullet and creating feelings of nausea.
- Paisley Girl
Rest assured, PG, that I am lying in wait, ready to pounce on the first Canadian politician who: (1) says or does something so colossally stupid that it requires santorumization, and (2) whose name lends itself to santorumization. As I've said before (and must, it appears, harp on endlessly since folks keep nominating him), Stephen Harper fails the second requirement. Harp is already a noun ('a triangular-shaped instrument that has a curved neck and stings stretched between the neck and the body') and a verb ('to repeat or stress something in a way that becomes tiresome'). Promoting 'harper' as slang might be misinterpreted; some idiots would think it was someone who plays the harp, others that it was someone who, well, harps on and on.
To my Canadian readers: we will santorumize one of your politicians -- keep those nominations coming! -- but it can't be Stephen 'Kandahar' Harper.
Tell Ladyboy Lover, the Cleveland man who wants to meet Asian ladyboys, about Asia SF, a bar in San Francisco. The servers and bartenders are all Asian ladyboys. It's a lot closer than Thailand.
- Visit Us In SF
Tell Ladyboy Lover that he doesn't need to go all the way to Thailand to feast his peepers on luscious ladyboys - all he needs to do is hop on a plane to the UK and come to Brighton where the legendary Ladyboys of Bangkok are performing all this month for a mere £10 ($18) a ticket as part of the Brighton Festival!
- UK Welcome Mat
This straight boy was dazed and confused after accidentally being exposed to a ladyboy show in Chicago. After the show, the bartenders told us some of the performers were drag queens and asked me to guess which. I guessed that two were real women - I even pointed out the perfect ass on one and the perfect legs on the other. Then everybody laughed and said, They're all ladyboys! So tell your friend in Cleveland to try Queen Albert Lounge on Irving Park Road in Chicago.
- Suddenly Bi-Curious George
People helping people it's what Savage Love is all about. Thanks for writing in, VUISF, UKWM and SBCG. But wait a minute aren't there any ladyboy bars or shows in Canada?
Send your Savage Love questions to email@example.com