boyfriend of three years cheated on me with a girl in Canada.
Then he came home and had a phone and e-mail relationship
with her, and then he went to visit her in Canada again. When
I found out what was going on I offered him an open relationship
and he refused. He promised to never speak to this Canadian
woman again and I forgave him for cheating. But I need your
help in understanding his behavior. Most of all, I need your
opinion as to whether a man like this will continue to cheat
on me. And if he wants to be with other women, why not just
accept the open relationship?
But Cannot Forget
regarding forgiveness: Your boyfriend didn’t just get drunk
at a party in darkest Canada and bang some maple-flavored
slut, FBCF. That kind of run-of-the-mill infidelity—committed
at a safe distance, with someone the cheater was unlikely
to see again—can and should be forgiven. Your boyfriend fucked
this maple-flavored slut, then spent weeks auditioning her
on phone and online and in person for the role of his next
girlfriend. That’s not something you should forgive, FBCF,
at least not at year three in a relationship.
Second, to answer your questions: Yes, your boyfriend will
continue to cheat on you, FBCF, and he’s going to think he’ll
get away with it next time. Because now, thanks to your failure
to see your boyfriend for what he is (lying scum!), your boyfriend
thinks you’re an idiot (and he may be right). He will attempt
to take advantage of your manifest idiocy in the future, I
assure you. And why would your boyfriend turn down your offer
of an open relationship? The likeliest reason is this: He
wants to fuck other people, FBCF, but he doesn’t want YOU
to fuck other people. Christ, what an asshole. DTMFA, FBCF,
I am a 37-year-old soccer mom and an avid reader of your
column, which I love—excepting all the santorum stuff, which
got a little tedious.
Do I have a problem? Oh, yes I do. After 15 years of truly
great vanilla sex with a husband I adore, I am bored with
sex. I can’t stand it anymore. The thought of him sucking
my clit again makes me about as hot as the thought of him
sucking my elbow. I think we are really ripe to move beyond
vanilla sex, but I have no idea what that means. Help me before
I pull the sexy grocery boy into the minivan out of sheer
in the Midwest
want to know what moving beyond vanilla sex means. . . .
That’s a tough one, BITM, because “moving beyond vanilla sex”
means whatever you and your husband and/or the sexy grocery
boy want it to mean. I could tick off a long list of kinks
that you and the husband and/or the grocery boy can explore
together—public sex, pegging, three-ways, vaginal fisting,
watersports, spanking, etc.—but if you’re a regular reader
of this column, BITM, you’re no doubt familiar with all of
these kinks. What good does my list do you?
No, what you and the husband and/or the sexy grocery boy need—and
this is going to make me sound like Ye Olde Tyme Advice Professional—are
better communication skills. You and the husband need to have
a long talk. (You should leave the sexy grocery boy out of
it—for now.) Memorize these opening remarks: “Look, honey,
I love you. But I’m bored. Sexually. Since this is a problem
for me, honey, it’s a problem for you. We’ve got to broaden
our sexual horizons or I’m going to lose my freakin’ mind.”
Now here’s the tricky part: Once you tell your husband how
deadly serious this problem is, you have to shift gears immediately.
If you go into this “long, hard slog” attitude, BITM, you’re
only going to make the problem worse. Approach it instead
like it’s a grand sexual adventure you’re about to go on together.
And your first adventure should be this: Each of you needs
to draw up your own list of “beyond vanilla” kinks you want
to/would be willing to explore. You can get ideas reading
this here column, of course, but also by reading sex manuals,
watching porn, and surfing the Internet. Then you should take
turns picking things off each other’s list that you want to
try. Nothing besides shit, animals, and children should be
off-limits, and neither of you is allowed to say “no” to anything
on the other’s list until after you’ve made a good-faith effort
to enjoy it.
Finally, BITM, I’m sorry you find the santorum stuff tedious,
because speaking of santorum. . . .
A brief note: Your column is read worldwide. To readers
who do not live in the United States (I live in Canada), your
continued references to a politician named Santorum are lost
on us, and the references to the “frothy mixture” only serve
to disgust. I appreciate that you dislike this arrogant public
figure, but please spare us the repetitious descriptions of
Over Acronyms Needlessly
brief riposte: As I am the only sex advice columnist in history,
Canadian or American, to devote an entire column to the issue
of who will be Canadian head of state when Queen Elizabeth
II finally croaks, FOAN, which was no doubt lost on my American
readers, I think my Canadian readers should cut me some fucking
slack, yo. And if my Canadian readers would like to nominate
an arrogant Canadian public figure for the santorum treatment,
I will duly inflict that person, and the disgusting sex act
subsequently attached to his or her name, on my American readers.
When you first linked Rick Santorum’s name to [description
of shitfoam deleted], I thought it would never stick. I was
wrong. As someone has probably pointed out to you, if you
put “Santorum” into Google, the first three hits are to his
Senate website, the next two are to CNN articles about his
comments on homosexuality, and the two after that are about
santorum, that frothy mix.
You may have heard of what happens if you type “French
military victories” into a Google search engine. (The first
hit is a page that says, “No standard Web pages containing
all your search terms were found.”) You might want to post
a challenge to all the computer geeks out there to do something
similar, Dan, so the first entry a Google search of “Santorum”
brings up is your definition, not Senator Santorum’s official
Web site. Surely that would promote the cause, don’t you think?
on My Mind
would, SOMM, and I hereby challenge computer geeks to move
my definition of santorum to the top slot on Google.
As for the ongoing success of the Savage Love santorum campaign,
I could fill the column, week after week, with nothing but
notes from people about their own use of the word and the
unexpected places they’ve heard others using it—from the floor
of the Wisconsin State Senate to U.S. military bases in Afghanistan!—but
bowing to the delicate sensibilities of my readers (and editors),
I’m going to refrain from doing so. Instead I’m going to put
up a Web site where people can track the spread of santorum
and share their santorum stories. Look for the URL in next
week’s Savage Love.