Thursday, February 11, 2010

From My Orbit

As per usual, read the letters here.

LW#1: You're wondering if your being the backdoor man for a woman with a husband stricken with Alzheimer's (and who was a cold fish years before symptoms appeared) is a morally wrong thing.

I'll give you a one word answer: No.

This is a situation to which I am no stranger, either. There is a marital relationship that has been disrupted by a different long-term degenerative disease in my own extended family, and the not-sick partner has partnered up with a woman he intends to marry when his wife, who is in a long term care facility, dies. He would never think of divorcing his wife, and he cares studiously for her every single day. That's just who he is.

But people have a right to pursue happiness in this country, and intimacy — emotional and sexual — are very big keys to happiness. And people who are caring for mates who are beyond being able to even recognize them are in a particular situation where they could use some intimacy and strength.

Flip this equation around. What if you were in love with someone and you knew you were slowly losing it? When you are completely incapacitated, would you think your marital bonds were more important than your loved one's happiness?

Dan Savage would say that if one partner in a relationship is not meeting — excuse me, not trying to meet — the sexual needs of the other partner, sex outside the marriage is fair game. It's kind of a blunt diagnosis, but I think in general it's right. If the husband continues to receive the same attention and care that she has been showing him, he's getting something good and worthy. And she is continuing to be someone good and worthy.

And that's pretty much all I have to say about it.

LW#2: The secret admirer thing is thrilling because it's creepy. Forgo the secret gift and just ask her verbally if she'd like to go out with you sometime.

So just make your intentions known. As I said last week, boys who put themselves out there to girls they are 60 percent sure kind of dig them are 100 percent more likely to get results than boys who keep beating around the bush until they are firmly ensconced in the "friend zone." Plus, if you get a no, you can keep your dignity and go, uh, beat around some other bush.

LW#3: Oh, man, it is bad when girlfriends do not let other girlfriends know their bfs have big red flags all over them.

Your mom needs to have a talk with Alice about this man, say that you were intrigued by this NFL draft pick from your school but found no record of his playing there (and then *she* needs to call your school's alumni relations people and ask about this guy to really check his story), say that she got curious about this jet fighter thing and hey, there's no airfield there, and Alice, sweetie, are you sure you know what you're getting into here?

Because this is the thing girlfriends do. We let each other make some mistakes, but if we see a doozy coming, we get real with each other. I have done this for my gfs, and they have done it for me.

But I've never had to throw myself in front of such Drew/Scott Peterson-esque creepy stuff before.

LW#4: Well aren't you two progressive?

How is it that you two are both getting all this play? I call fakeroonies on this letter. There are people who get laid a lot in college by a lot of people, sure, and they are athletes and pot dealers and no one else.

But anyway, if you two are going to be analytical about your sexual life, you're not going to get anywhere. Because being monogamous, much like being non-exclusive, is about meeting a need that is not rational. You're not going to be able to use the same vocab, much less outwit your bf into coming around to your way of thinking. This is about needs, and feelings, which are not silly at all.

Frankly, if this is your elephant in the room, and you think he's going to make you feel like less of a person or stupid or naive for being vulnerable and having feelings and needs, this guy sounds like a loser. And a manipulative twat to boot. ("I'm just being frank, baby. I love you alone, but Mindy was a hot lay the other night. I like banging other chicks and having you here in case I can't find any on Thursday night. You can take that level of honesty, right?" "Uh, yeah, of course.")

Your partner should be someone who loves you and wants to make you happy, not someone who makes you feel small for wanting to be exclusive. Being exclusive should not be a sacrifice to someone who really loves you.

BTW you're totally young and you will change a lot over the next decade and have a lot of time to meet someone who will meet your needs. Because I think you should DTMFA and look for a guy who won't walk all over you, or pretend that "frankness" is honesty when it is actually manipulation.


  1. Spaci laidie,
    Where is sum LOLcats? I looks all over and every wik I has a big sad cuz no catz. bu hu.


  2. Good advice, Spacey, but I think Dan Savage would disagree w/your monogamy stance in LW4. If monogamy is important to her, she needs to find someone to whom it is also important.

    Happy V.D. to ya! :-D

  3. I got ur Lolcats, peeps.

    And yeah, Skoorbza. I know. But it's about her when I'm writing, not her doosh of a bf. I hope she has DTMFA.