I'm satisfied with my marriage, but for the last year I've worked with someone who has become a good friend. She's married too. In the last two months, I've found myself thinking about her a lot. So I decided to tell her, and I found that she had the same feelings for me. We kissed, but we stopped there. I don't want to leave my wife. My friend doesn't want to leave her husband, and she felt bad about us kissing.
You might ask what I want. It's not sex. But I love her company and love to kiss and hug her. Now she tries to avoid being in the same room with me alone. I can feel that. I don't know what to do. I want her. I suggested that we have a no-emotion, relaxed kind of affair; just be with each other when we can. But she says it won't work. But we like each other and care about each other, and that has to count for something. Instead, we care about everybody and forget ourselves. Is it fair? Can't we for once think about ourselves? I see her every day, I think about her every night, and I suffer. I am going to show her this letter with your answer, so please answer. --MSM
You say it's not sex you're after, but you do want an affair--which as I understand the word, means you want to enjoy her carnally, not just her company. It's a little too late to have a "no-emotion, relaxed kind of affair," as there's already an awful lot of emotion going on here, so you're not being totally honest with her about your feelings when you say it isn't about sex. It is about sex, all about sex. Your cut-rate psychobabble rhetoric about caring for each other, being fair to yourselves, your suffering, blahblahblah is two parts transparent rationalization and two parts horny-boy-wheedling--a grown-up's adulterous variation on a younger man's lamest pick-up line: "We can just cuddle."
Not that I have anything against adultery. But what I think won't make a whole hell of a lot of difference to her; she's concerned that messing around with you will put her marriage at risk. And no doubt she's right, especially if you two really do share as intense an attraction as you claim. But for what it's worth, here are my two cents: you guys have a couple of options. Avoid being alone, tough it out, and in time this unconsummated crush will pass; or fuck and get it over with, and in time this consummated crush will pass. Either option is a workable one. Unfortunately, it sounds like she's already chosen option one. Sucks to be you.
Although my girlfriend and myself are not married, we are perpetual live-ins and have a very close relationship. But we're basically not having sex very often. For me, it's just not exciting, kinky, or adventurous enough. She is way into sex, but she is more conservative and "inexperienced." We have discussed this to the point of exhaustion. I had a heavy sexual relationship with a sexual dynamo and nymphet a few years back who was very comfortable with nudity and had a high sex drive. We did it all, everywhere, anytime, all the time. It was pure, raw, and aggressive. I can't get it out of my mind, and I've tried. I've tried. I've tried.
My girlfriend doesn't know that I compare and has told me to "teach" her things. I've tried, but it's got to come from the inside. The sex drive has to be a natural, innate desire. When my ex and I were together, we NEVER talked about it, we just did it and it clicked. It never required thought or planning or discussion. Is this relationship doomed? Is it normal to compare girlfriends? --Kink Aficionado
It's perfectly normal to compare present loves to past loves--actually, it's impossible not to. But whether or not it's true, it's good policy to tell current lovers that they're the best sex you've ever had. If it's true, well ain't life grand. If it's not, after telling them they're the best sex you've ever had, get to work on making them the best you've ever had.
This relationship is not doomed--so long as you're willing to make your present girlfriend into the slut your ex-girlfriend spoiled you for. And the exact wrong way to accomplish this is by discussing her sexual inadequacies "to the point of exhaustion." Shut up and fuck. She's expressed an interest in being taught things--so teach. Drives may be innate, but tastes can definitely be acquired.
Why do women refuse to ever be sexual with me even after the smoothest possible breakup on good terms? Are women either on or off? It seems like when they're on and they like you, they'll do anything: rim jobs, spankings, vaginal fisting, sex on a motorcycle, whatever (gentle lovey-dovey sex, too). But after a relationship has ended on good terms, time has passed and both people are unattached, the very same women who did all of these wild and fun things with me will say some variation of, "Well, I still love you a lot, but I don't want to lose you as a friend." (?!?) Or they look like the very idea of sex now is some hideous joke. Are women only on once per man per lifetime? I know there are exceptions, but this seems to be the standard pattern and I'm trying to understand it. Any insights? --Get It While You Can
Most people--queer, straight, male, female--have a standard operating procedure around fucking exes: they don't do it. Speaking for myself, when I dump someone, it's usually because I don't want to sleep with him anymore; and when someone dumps me, however amicable the parting may have been, my feelings are a little hurt. Whatever lingering sexual attraction still exists is trumped by feelings of loss, melancholy, and homicidal rage.
These girls that you've dated, fisted, and dumped--or been dumped by, a likelier scenario--are probably not interested in you anymore for the same reasons I'm not interested in my ex-boyfriends: if I still wanted to fuck him, he wouldn't be my ex. Finally, fuck buddies--friends who fuck--usually don't date prior to becoming fuck buddies.
You may be wondering why there just ain't no jokes in this week's column. Well, it's because I haven't slept for three days, and I'm fresh out of crystal meth. I couldn't work myself up into my usual column-writing lather, so three profoundly stoopid straight boys squeaked by without getting the pummeling they deserved.
But I did think of something funny as I sat here writing this column. Unfortunately, there wasn't a way to work it into any of the above responses--this Q&A format can be so restricting at times. But here it is, something funny, rather inelegantly tacked on the end of this week's column:
If some fucked-up technology-obsessed cult o' wackos based in California had to off themselves en masse, why couldn't it have been the Scientologists? But there are still 39 fewer people in California designing Web sites, and that's some consolation.
Send questions to Savage Love, Chicago Reader, 11 E. Illinois, Chicago 60611.