I would amend comment 2 to read: "She assumes all her readers are women are totally whipped men."

you fuck them till they come, then you fuck them till you come. don't mention fat, don't mention facial hair, don't mention feminine odors.

see, women are just too delicate to be able to handle the criticism they dish out. a ridiculous state of affairs

Some are, some aren't. Same goes for men. Most people who are happy to dish out criticism can't hear it about themselves, gender totally aside. The whole "never-tell-your-girlfriend-she's-fat" thing really does a disservice to both sides.

On the up side, this column made me realize that my guy (horrifically honest in all other ways) was never going to just tell me if I was getting too big for him. So I asked, point-blank. And got an honest, if somewhat discomfited answer. About time! So thanks, Dan! And I hope the show went well - Sue Johanson's an awesome lady.

gosh, Dan, so simple, can tell you are a true fag

the spell/quest of the vagina does not occur to you, or if so, not with the intensity which drives straight men to the edge

ask charles

gay men beat off and go to sleep

Granted he implied that the alleged fatness would push these hubbies into the arms of macho, macho men instead of their female glassy-eyed supplicants, but still. Consistency, please.

There might be some truth to that logic (it's possible that many women require an emotional connection for good sex more so than men), but it's still bullshit to make excuses.

This is all well and good, but what I don't get about women is why they even have to ask. I mean, unless you have some serious anorexia/body dismorphic disorder, the fact that you are wondering whether you are too fat means that you are probably too fat.

Why put both of you through the pain of making the poor guy say it? You know, he knows it. Either do something about it or don't. Sitting there and forcing him to admit just seems kind of cruel.

also, i think the columnist has a enough sense to tell the reader what she wants to hear. if she wanted her husband back, she would be thrilled that he was paying attention to her again. but she started falling out of love and moving on at least four years ago. she was getting in shape in order to move on, not to move back to the not-fucking/not-talking lump. she sought "permission" from an outside source that was still another woman from her own generation. i think the advise was perfect, and the mode of delivery suited the audience.

the second one -- can't tell as much, you gave less info. but i think she was rightish too, his letter is all "i can't decide" and she says, look harder at yourself and decide.

i may not like her writing or share her readers' concerns, but she clearly knows her audience and is giving them the advice they want in a flavor they can choke down.

Was it not obvious that the "sexist" accusation here had to do with the columnist advising a woman that her husband's lack of sexual interest in her wasn't her failing but his, while suggesting to a man that his wife's sexual interest in other men WAS his failing and not hers? In the same column, no less?

tsm: did you miss that dan said he'd never heard of her or read her column before? so two out of two doesn't really say much about anybody.

i still maintain she told each person what they wanted/needed to hear. she wanted/needed to hear "leave" and he wanted/needed to hear that he needed to grow up and decide -- he can't decide if she cheated and he can't decide what it should mean and the advice was, "figure it out/figure you out." you don't go around confronting spouses until you are sure you want to leave or have the big awful run through that will keep you together, it's not something to do in the navel gazing phase.