By Jake Rossen
By Jesse Marx
By Michelle LeBow
By Alleen Brown
By Maggie LaMaack
By CP Staff
By Jesse Marx
I hope you can help me. I am a 39-year-old divorced mother of four. I'm also a grandmother. I've started seeing a younger man, age 25, who is only a few years older than my oldest kid. We hit it off great and other than the sex, everything is beautiful. The problem is that my sex life with my ex-husband of 20 years was very free. We did everything from toys to bondage to watching porn together to three-ways.
My new guy is not happy that I have a collection of toys or that I watch porn, have been to strip clubs, etc. He likes "regular" sex and he refuses to use toys or do anything in the adventurous realm. How do I even talk with him about what I like without scaring him off? I love being tied up and spanked! Plus he has never done oral and doesn't even want to try! HELP!!!
Frustrated GILF In Minnesota
You're not gonna get what you want—excuse me, what you deserve, Grandma, what you have a right to demand and expect—from this boy if you're not willing to risk scaring him off.
Considering his age, FGIM, it's possible that your boyfriend, during his very recent childhood, was locked in a classroom with a sexually repressed idiot who "taught" him that sexual ignorance is a virtue and that a limited sexual repertoire is pleasing to Jesus. They call it "abstinence education," and it induces a kind of sexual imbecility (as well as leading to higher rates of STI transmission, teen pregnancy, and American Idol auditions).
Now you, Grandma Hoses, are going to have to undo the damage done. You will have to "school" him, as the young people were recently saying. Sit the boy down and tell him that you're older, wiser, and more experienced, and that you intend to drag his butt up to your level, not allow him to drag yours down to his. Tell him exactly what you like, tell him exactly how you like it, and make sure he understands that you're not interested in being with someone long-term who isn't interested in meeting your needs.
You have leverage here, FGIM. Use it.
Gay here. The BF and I have a modestly open relationship—three-ways once in a while, one-offs very rarely. It spices up the home life and reinforces trust, blah blah blah. So, the BF was visiting the folks the week between Christmas and New Year's. We'd both agreed to have a one-off that week and share the juicy details when he got back. Saturday night, I had this guy over and we fucked like crazy. The BF got home Sunday, and we had a sexy time reviewing the juicy details of our respective indiscretions.
Monday (New Year's Eve), I was chatting with our neighbors. They're crazy, tequila-loving Texans, and liberals in most respects—except, they've hinted, where sex is concerned. So, they asked how the BF and I were doing, and when I mentioned that we were great—the BF had just returned from a 10-day trip—my neighbors' demeanor TOTALLY changed. Their usually playful and friendly selves turned immediately to ice.
They didn't say anything, but I realized what happened: They heard me and the one-off going at it and thought that I had cheated on my BF in his absence! I had, of course, but it was BF-sanctioned cheating! They've been very cold to me since. We like them and don't want to screw up our acquaintanceship over a silly misunderstanding! I'm usually very direct with people, but I worry that admitting that I cheated and that the BF was in on it will solve one problem and create another. We don't want our Texans to think we're a couple of perverts! Suggestions?
Sissies Love Understanding Texans
P.S. They hear us go at it ALL the time. I should've seen this coming!
Straight Texans who aren't bothered by the sounds of actual queers actually going at it, SLUT, won't be destroyed by your nonmonogamous news. That your relationship allows for a little outside sexual contact—safe outside contact, I hope—may not delight them, being sexual conservatives and all, but the current state of affairs has to please them less than the truth would.
Can't you see how unfair you're being, SLUT? Right now, the neighbors think you're a cheating piece of shit and your boyfriend is a fool. So long as you allow them to go on assuming that you're officially monogamous, they're going to feel like unwilling coconspirators in your "infidelity." They've probably had more than one conversation about what, if anything, they should say to your boyfriend.
Leaving them in that position isn't fair, SLUT, it isn't neighborly, and they're going to come to resent you more and more. There's only one way out: The two of you—it can't be you alone, because they'll only assume they're being pulled into another lie—will have to go and tell them the hole fucking truth.
Do you know any lawyers willing to take on a personal-injury suit concerning fisting-induced fibromyalgia? When I call local personal-injury lawyers here in Eugene, Oregon, they get all flustered.
"It is a little controversial whether fibromyalgia is a real disease at all or just a mysterious constellation of symptoms," says Dr. Barak Gaster, Savage Love's long-suffering resident medical expert. "Most mainstream doctors accept it as real, but it's still in the slightly dubious category."
Fibromyalgia's constellation of symptoms includes fatigue, generalized pain, irritable bowel syndrome, headaches, and roughly 400 other complaints. But you fibromyalgia sufferers have arrived: There's a new drug on the market with a goofy name (Lyrica), an annoying ad campaign (courtesy of Pfizer), and its own constellation of possible side effects (hives, difficulty breathing, swelling of the tongue, dizziness, sleepiness, blurred vision, etc.).
But fisting-induced fibromyalgia? Maybe skidmarkalgia can be induced by fisting, FF, but not fibromyalgia. "That would NOT be considered credible in any real way whatsoever," says Dr. Barack. You may have fibromyalgia, FF, and you may have been fisted before your diagnosis, but there's no relationship, and no personal-injury lawyer is going to take your case.
We wanted to let you know that we appreciated your recent remarks condemning bestiality. We agree that it is wrong, wrong, wrong for the very same reason that you pointed out—the issue of consent. However, we don't agree with your advice that zoophiles should "get a tall fence." The zoophile who wrote you desperately needs counseling and should in no way be encouraged to have any contact with animals.
Like the pedophile who claims to "love" children, zoophiles might profess their love and caring for the object of their sexual desire, but it is without real consideration for the psychological and physical well-being of their nonconsenting partners. A recent study shows that 96 percent of offenders who had engaged in bestiality also admitted to committing sexual assaults on humans.
You do a wonderful job of humorously and intelligently dissecting the psychosexual conundrums of those who write to you. We worry, however, that your readers will miss your point and take away from your column that bestiality is acceptable when it is done behind "tall fences."
Colleen O'Brien, Director of Communications, PETA
Thanks for writing, Colleen, because I would hate for people to take away from that column—you know, that column, the one where I told RUFF to go get banged by dogs behind "tall fences"—that it's in any way permissible for a human person to get, you know, banged by canine dogs behind tall, tall fences. I'm grateful for the opportunity to clarify my position. Which is con. Because, you know, gross.
To read more letters—lots more—about my advice for RUFF, go to www.thestranger.com/savage/ruff.