Thursday, July 2, 2009
Homo / Religion Defense Of Marriage Asshole
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 5:14 PM
David Klinghoffer discovers a shocking truth about my marriage: like Mark Sanford's, Eliot Spitzer's, Bill Clinton's, John Ensign's, Larry Craig's, and several of Newt Gingrich's, my marriage isn't strictly monogamous. But unlike Clinton's, Ensign's, Sanford's, et al., mine is honest. The boyfriend and I are non-monogamous, as as I wrote The Commitment, the book where I cleverly buried this shameful secret about my marriage five years ago, but we're more non-monogamous in theory than we are in practice. So I'm sorry to say that my marriage isn't quite the raging fuck fest that Klinghoffer imagines it to be. (Or Slog trolls, for that matter.)
Hope that doesn't spoil the massive jack-off session you've got planned for tonight, David.
Once again: you don't have to be monogamous to be married or married to be monogamous. Straight people have been demonstrating that for millennia. The Hebrew Bible that David's always humping away at is shot through with examples of non-monogamous heterosexual men. (How many concubines did that King David person have again?) There's an organized movement of heterosexual swingers in the country and plenty of disorganized-but-honest straight non-monogamy going on out there too. So no one has to, as David encourages us to do, "imagine a man and a woman, of impeccably heterosexual tastes, with an open marriage on the Dan Savage model." There are lots of men and women out there with thoroughly heterosexual tastes who are in successful, long-term, open relationships—"marriages on the Dan Savage model"—that allow for varying degrees of outside sexual contact. Straight couples have been doing the legally-married-but-not-monogamous thing for a lot longer than gay couples have, David, so if anyone is modeling their marriage on anyone else's, gay people are modeling their open marriages on the open marriages of straight people.
Sorry, David, but monogamy isn't natural and men are particularly lousy at it—and for most of recorded human history, men weren't required or expected to be monogamous. Sixty or seventy years ago, in a moment of mass delusion, humanity decided to put the monogamy at the center of our marriages and, gee, how's that working out for us? I know this hard for monogamy fetishists to grasp, but here goes: Allowing for some outside sexual contact—being realistic and successfully negotiating some degree of openness—defuses one of the leading causes of divorce. It's pro-marriage, pro-stability, pro-family. It is a good and decent thing, not a threat to all things good and decent.
And my goodness, David, are you really so stupid as to invoke the story of Lot in defense of monogamous heterosexual marriage? You're going to point to Lot as an example of "modesty where private expressions of passion are kept private," David? After offering up his daughters to a mob to rape, Lot flees Sodom with the wife and kids. God turns Mrs. Lot into a pillar of salt for having the gall to take a peek over her shoulder at the fireworks, and then... Lot's daughters get their father drunk and have an incestuous threesome with dad and nine months later they present Lot with two sons/grandsons. My sexual "adventurism" may shock you, David, but I've never done anything so depraved as that lot.
Do open relationships hurt women, as David insists? Not according to the straight women I know who're actually in them. (Needless to say David doesn't know any women in open relationships—he doesn't seem to know they exist at all.) But who should these women believe? Their own life experiences or David "You're Doing It Wrong!" Klinghoffer? "Every woman with a brain in her head knows that in [an open] relationship," David writes, "she's likely to be the one who gets hurt." I guess that means that no one gets hurt in a closed relationship. Let me check with Mrs. Sanford, Mrs. Spitzer, Mrs. Clinton, et al., about that.
Here's the story I wrote for this year's queer issue that David just can't bring himself to link to.
Share via
1
It says right there under the title of his blog that he's recovering from the wisdom of the Hebrew Bible, Mr. Savage. Give the man a break, OK? I suppose when an alcoholic admits they have a problem you will take just that opportunity to jump in their shit for their drinking.
I salute you, David Klinghoffer. Keep working at it and don't skip any meetings, OK? If you feel the urge to stone an infidel and you don't think you can stop yourself, call me, will you?
I salute you, David Klinghoffer. Keep working at it and don't skip any meetings, OK? If you feel the urge to stone an infidel and you don't think you can stop yourself, call me, will you?
3
When married people are not monogamous they are breaking their marriage vows.
It is a mistake.
It is not a change in the definition of marriage.
You would further degrade the definition of marriage by stripping it of the element of monogamy.
The fundies may be right about you, Dan.
It is a mistake.
It is not a change in the definition of marriage.
You would further degrade the definition of marriage by stripping it of the element of monogamy.
The fundies may be right about you, Dan.
4
I'm thinking he has a thing for you, and he likes having the Slog monkeys up his site's hits.
Since, I said it well yesterday, I'm just going to copy and paste my comment about Sally. She and David appear to have the same issues.
"Poor Sally. She has no peanut butter cookies or leather bars in her life. I'd suggest she check out that clip on youtube, "I'd like to dress you up in leather" (great song and dance routine, and lovely men), but it was removed because the poster didn't have permission.
Seriously, those who appear to live in fear require a level of "Fundamentalism", they find comfort in fixed rules and unquestioned doctrines, which if not checked can become legalism. It makes it easy to become a religious elitist who judgementally frowns upon those who are not as "spiritual" as they think themselves to be."
Since, I said it well yesterday, I'm just going to copy and paste my comment about Sally. She and David appear to have the same issues.
"Poor Sally. She has no peanut butter cookies or leather bars in her life. I'd suggest she check out that clip on youtube, "I'd like to dress you up in leather" (great song and dance routine, and lovely men), but it was removed because the poster didn't have permission.
Seriously, those who appear to live in fear require a level of "Fundamentalism", they find comfort in fixed rules and unquestioned doctrines, which if not checked can become legalism. It makes it easy to become a religious elitist who judgementally frowns upon those who are not as "spiritual" as they think themselves to be."
5
The fact that Terry isn't enough for you and your assertion of historic infidelity does not make it honorable that you can't respect the other father of your child enough to control yourself.
Sorry charlie.
Sorry charlie.
6
Bra-fucking-vo, Dan. Well said. I bet he just wishes HE could be the one you're monogomous with. If only you'd give him a chance!
7
Are you going to get a "Kingdom of Priests" tag soon? I mean, the guy's a moron and a jerk, but really, do you need to update us on his every post? I'd prefer to forget he exists...
But yeah, his casual misogyny in talking about women (OBVIOUSLY there are no real lesbians, they're just repressing their love for cock; OBVIOUSLY women have no passion and desire of their own; OBVIOUSLY women are the ones hurt in open relationships, because they could never desire non-monogamy for themselves) may be even more disturbing than his anti-gay attitudes.
But yeah, his casual misogyny in talking about women (OBVIOUSLY there are no real lesbians, they're just repressing their love for cock; OBVIOUSLY women have no passion and desire of their own; OBVIOUSLY women are the ones hurt in open relationships, because they could never desire non-monogamy for themselves) may be even more disturbing than his anti-gay attitudes.
8
Maybe you should be more specific, Dan. Social monogamy is natural, with many examples in human societies and throughout the animal kingdom. Sexual monogamy, however, is a little more complicated.
10
Yeah, Kim and laterite beat me to it...
Dan, can't you tell, this guy David totally has a crush on you! He's acting just like the third grade kid, teasing his secret love.
Dan, can't you tell, this guy David totally has a crush on you! He's acting just like the third grade kid, teasing his secret love.
11
Kim is probably right: Klinghoffer has a thing for you. Or in his words, he has "tug towards temptation" when he sees your pic /video clips. Otherwise, why does he keep posting about you and your "shocking" choices? He may like the increase in readership due to the visits by the SLOG monkeys but he certainly doesn't engage anyone who asks serious questions at his site. Another admirer who cannot resist you - better hope he isn't a secret stalker!
12
Also, I love how Slog's Monique is a major supporting character of this drama. (Is that the Original Monique? I assume so, but maybe it's some shabby knock-off Monique...)
13
My experience with a non-monogamous wife was that she was upset with the fact that her husband was screwing another woman, but put it aside for the sake of stability and keeping the man happy.
But then, she was a bit of a prude. The break in the relationship was more because of the rocky sex life.
But then, she was a bit of a prude. The break in the relationship was more because of the rocky sex life.
14
Dan, do you speak for all gays on the issue of monogamy?
Is infidelity an inherent aspect of homosexual marriage?
Is infidelity an inherent aspect of homosexual marriage?
15
" Every woman with a brain in her head knows that in such a relationship, she's likely to be the one who gets hurt."
Wait, so open marriages victimize women? I know plenty of women who would beg to differ on that point. Women cannot handle being in a trusting, yet non-monogamous relationship? Once again Klinghoffer's mysogyny shines through.
Wait, so open marriages victimize women? I know plenty of women who would beg to differ on that point. Women cannot handle being in a trusting, yet non-monogamous relationship? Once again Klinghoffer's mysogyny shines through.
16
even after all of the times you've posted this guy's picture, the gay-face on him just stops me dead.
his wife must love having sex with a man who keeps his eyes closed and runs for the shower as soon as *he is done.
his wife must love having sex with a man who keeps his eyes closed and runs for the shower as soon as *he is done.
18
Woman in a happy non-monogamous relationship here to say "Bravo!" I have nothing against monogamy - I've met plenty of people who were happiest in monogamous relationships, and who quite sensibly paired up with other people who feel the same way - but it certainly isn't the One True Way to have a relationship.
To #3, my marriage vows certainly didn't include anything about monogamy, just promising to love and cherish each other forever. (We're doing pretty well so far.) What vows are we breaking? You're free to make the kind of marriage you want, just extend us the same courtesy.
To #3, my marriage vows certainly didn't include anything about monogamy, just promising to love and cherish each other forever. (We're doing pretty well so far.) What vows are we breaking? You're free to make the kind of marriage you want, just extend us the same courtesy.
19
@3 what if I wrote my own vows and they didn't have anything about monogamy in them?
Pff, I don't remember anything about monogamy, just vow to love and support each other, which we always have done and always will do.
Pff, I don't remember anything about monogamy, just vow to love and support each other, which we always have done and always will do.
20
@ 16: "even after all of the times you've posted this guy's picture, the gay-face on him just stops me dead."
I know, eww, especially 'cause it comes of as that self hating yet smug gay-face.
I know, eww, especially 'cause it comes of as that self hating yet smug gay-face.
21
18
19
Adultery is illegal in at least 22 states.
Must we change the legal definition of marriage to conform to the lowest definition anyone happens to come up with?
Maybe people could write their own mortgage contracts....
look! it says I only have to pay $10 a month!
19
Adultery is illegal in at least 22 states.
Must we change the legal definition of marriage to conform to the lowest definition anyone happens to come up with?
Maybe people could write their own mortgage contracts....
look! it says I only have to pay $10 a month!
23
Hey Kim, I wonder why you haven't been able to come up with a response to my question? Oh that's riiiiite. You can't.
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Comme…
#34 under to title Summer in the City
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Comme…
#34 under to title Summer in the City
22
Dan,
I believe the solution David Klinghoffer is looking for that would protect women is to legalize sam sex marriage for lesbians. Then, women wouldn't have to worry about the sexual behavior of men, and they could get their sexual needs met by women. Plus, since he believes women don't give in to their animalistic urges like men, then they won't hurt each other, which will lead to more satisfied relationships.
I believe the solution David Klinghoffer is looking for that would protect women is to legalize sam sex marriage for lesbians. Then, women wouldn't have to worry about the sexual behavior of men, and they could get their sexual needs met by women. Plus, since he believes women don't give in to their animalistic urges like men, then they won't hurt each other, which will lead to more satisfied relationships.
24
I can't really bring myself to go to the priest kingdom blog or whatever it's called so the following comments are uninformed and subject to correction, but... what's the obsession with seeking to impose his idea of marriage on everyone else? Honestly, what's it to the king priest if Dan's marriage is wide open or wired shut or slightly ajar or whatever else? Can't these people just live and let live?
26
@21But all kinds of shit is illegal that shouldn't be illegal. Why should it be illegal for me to do have consensual sex with someone with my husband's permission?
How on earth does that degrade anyone else's marriage?
How on earth does that degrade anyone else's marriage?
27
Dan,
I wish you all the best in your verbal fight with this dude.
However, please know, religious bigots like this guy won't ever really see shit the way you do. Going back and forth with him is futile.
Yes, it's ignorant to think that homosexuals will take over the world and force everybody to have huge orgies, but obviously common sense and understanding what love is are beyond this guy's comprehension.
You, I and a lot of people who read your work (gay AND straight) know your true motives - don't let this guy get you down or upset.
WE appreciate you. Please ignore this douchebag.
Thanks.
I wish you all the best in your verbal fight with this dude.
However, please know, religious bigots like this guy won't ever really see shit the way you do. Going back and forth with him is futile.
Yes, it's ignorant to think that homosexuals will take over the world and force everybody to have huge orgies, but obviously common sense and understanding what love is are beyond this guy's comprehension.
You, I and a lot of people who read your work (gay AND straight) know your true motives - don't let this guy get you down or upset.
WE appreciate you. Please ignore this douchebag.
Thanks.
28
@ 24, to be fair, Dan engaged Klinghoffer first by posting and mocking an absolute ludicrous thesis from his blog that gay marriage would victimize straight women (because all men would turn insta-gay and abandon them. For serious).
Ever since then, they've been engaged in a passive-aggressive blog war. Slog readers have headed over there on mass to ridicule Klinghoffer, and occasionally ask him trenchant questions about his warped logic (which he consistently ignores; he only takes cheap shots). We haven't seen any of the reverse over here. I think it's because Klinghoffer doesn't actually have a readership.
Ever since then, they've been engaged in a passive-aggressive blog war. Slog readers have headed over there on mass to ridicule Klinghoffer, and occasionally ask him trenchant questions about his warped logic (which he consistently ignores; he only takes cheap shots). We haven't seen any of the reverse over here. I think it's because Klinghoffer doesn't actually have a readership.
29
Tsk, tsk. If he wants to stay happy in his oh, so hetero and closed off marriage, I diagnose a good, hard pegging. He can pretend it's Dan, and his wife can enjoying fucking HIM over for a change. Everyone wins!
30
Troll # 12,
Sorry, I was cooking my family dinner.
My family grew up around John Henry Waddell, his work hangs in my home, many of us have served as models. The bronze nudes at the U.S. Open are his. To me the human body is a work of art, to be appreciated for its beauty, construction, and function. www.palmdesertartistregistry.com/john_he…
And, my husband agreed, the man was lovely, too.
Sorry, I was cooking my family dinner.
My family grew up around John Henry Waddell, his work hangs in my home, many of us have served as models. The bronze nudes at the U.S. Open are his. To me the human body is a work of art, to be appreciated for its beauty, construction, and function. www.palmdesertartistregistry.com/john_he…
And, my husband agreed, the man was lovely, too.
32
HAH, Kim at 30 and your completely incongruent analogy/answer.
These INANIMATE sculptures aren't exactly men you come across in your daily life that harbor the ability to steal you from your husband with their mysteriousness, newness, and bigger cocks.
FAIL.
There is simply no excuse for this, as your attempt underscores.
These INANIMATE sculptures aren't exactly men you come across in your daily life that harbor the ability to steal you from your husband with their mysteriousness, newness, and bigger cocks.
FAIL.
There is simply no excuse for this, as your attempt underscores.
33
26
Do you ever seek permission to have sex with a married man? If so, do you also seek the permission of his wife?
Do you ever seek permission to have sex with a married man? If so, do you also seek the permission of his wife?
35
Okay, we've had our fun with the crazy Hebrew fundie. Let's stop upping the hits on his site.
I blame religion for this.
I blame religion for this.
36
HAH, Troll # 12 @32,
They are when they're some of his models. Therefore, I do come across them in my daily life, in fact, I'm married to one of his subjects. And, guess what, I'm one of his subjects.
I have no interest in being stolen away from my husband. Nor does he have any desire to be stolen away from me, we're happy. We value or relationship and put time and effort into it.
I'm off now. So, have a good evening. I hope you develop the ability to understand that recognizing beauty doesn't necessarily involve lust. You can notice someone is beautiful without desiring them sexually.
They are when they're some of his models. Therefore, I do come across them in my daily life, in fact, I'm married to one of his subjects. And, guess what, I'm one of his subjects.
I have no interest in being stolen away from my husband. Nor does he have any desire to be stolen away from me, we're happy. We value or relationship and put time and effort into it.
I'm off now. So, have a good evening. I hope you develop the ability to understand that recognizing beauty doesn't necessarily involve lust. You can notice someone is beautiful without desiring them sexually.
37
Yeah, Klinghoffer is clearly gay and of course like all of you I disagree with his views. *However*, he sure gives us *heterosexual women* a fuck of a lot more consideration and attention than Dan I-can-only-see-penis Savage does. Don't recall the last time Dan genuinely considered the feelings and perspectives of the heterosexual woman.
...Of course, the reason why the homo Klinghoffer is so sensitive to hetero women though is only due to all his secret guilt that he has to hold his breath and wince every time he fucks his wife. Sigh. If she only knew.
...Of course, the reason why the homo Klinghoffer is so sensitive to hetero women though is only due to all his secret guilt that he has to hold his breath and wince every time he fucks his wife. Sigh. If she only knew.
38
Anti-poly troll = victim of a cheater.
That's my theory, anyway. Otherwise I could never understand his vitriol towards the completely reasonable & thoughtful comments of people in open relationships here.
That's my theory, anyway. Otherwise I could never understand his vitriol towards the completely reasonable & thoughtful comments of people in open relationships here.
39
Confluence: Are you sure? Have you ever READ Dan's column? Or listened to the podcast? He knows more about women's orgasm than some straight guys I know.
One of the reasons I love Dan's advice is because it is refreshingly unsexist -- he treats men's problems, women's problems, gay problems & straight problems exactly the same.
One of the reasons I love Dan's advice is because it is refreshingly unsexist -- he treats men's problems, women's problems, gay problems & straight problems exactly the same.
40
Well, Kim, I guess your relationship and Dan's relationship are completely different.
Dan seems to be always "interest[ed] in being stolen away from [his] husband."
You do not.
Dan seems to be always "interest[ed] in being stolen away from [his] husband."
You do not.
41
# 38 Singing Cynic: Or maybe projection/ repression? Anti poly troll can barely restrain zeself (pronouns difficult when trying to be gender free) from poly relationships - does so - realizes others don't / hates them for enjoying themselves?
Would explain level of vitriol........ be interesting to know. Don't suppose you want to give us more details, Troll # 12?
Would explain level of vitriol........ be interesting to know. Don't suppose you want to give us more details, Troll # 12?
42
@37, I'm genuinely surprised by your comments about Dan. I'd have said that he frequently gives incredibly thoughtful and empathetic advice to women on a huge range of issues. I'd also have thought that his perspective (the "I-can-only-see-penis" sketch is a bit fatuous don't you think?) is one of the valuable things about his advice. Sometimes you need an outsider, with no skin in the game, to be truly objective.
But hey, I'm a guy too, so maybe I don't get it either...
But hey, I'm a guy too, so maybe I don't get it either...
43
Magyar -
My perception is shaped by the fallout of e.v.e.r.y poly relationsyip that I have ever known. EVER.
Across days, months, or years, it is always the same.
The same jealous and painful fallouts that beseige all relatiohships.
You can act as progressive as you want to, but the fact remains: human relational patterns are subject to trust, possession, and imagined control. That sounds really harsh, but it is more true than any of your pseudo-enlightened current defenders of whatever happens to be your sexual situation want to admit.
I'm done.
For the sake of DJ, I hope Dan's "relationship" with Terry works out.
But several of us know the school DJ attends.
He can read now, right? His private school taught him well.
I wonder how he would respond to all of these writings by his dad delivered to him in a neat little manila envelope........
My perception is shaped by the fallout of e.v.e.r.y poly relationsyip that I have ever known. EVER.
Across days, months, or years, it is always the same.
The same jealous and painful fallouts that beseige all relatiohships.
You can act as progressive as you want to, but the fact remains: human relational patterns are subject to trust, possession, and imagined control. That sounds really harsh, but it is more true than any of your pseudo-enlightened current defenders of whatever happens to be your sexual situation want to admit.
I'm done.
For the sake of DJ, I hope Dan's "relationship" with Terry works out.
But several of us know the school DJ attends.
He can read now, right? His private school taught him well.
I wonder how he would respond to all of these writings by his dad delivered to him in a neat little manila envelope........
44
@43
Ok Troll, you are crossing a line that is verging on threatening. Mentioning that you know what school someone's KID attends?! Not cool.
Ok Troll, you are crossing a line that is verging on threatening. Mentioning that you know what school someone's KID attends?! Not cool.
45
Dan:
Alisun (on the Summer in the City thread) may be correct: # 43 sounds very much like a stalker. Please be careful.
Alisun (on the Summer in the City thread) may be correct: # 43 sounds very much like a stalker. Please be careful.
47
PS I would not and will never do that. I was being dramatic to wield a point. I repeat, I would not and would never interfere in somebody's personal life.
Dan has referenced private school in this blog, that's all I was going off of.
Dan has referenced private school in this blog, that's all I was going off of.
52
@27 (MT3) Bravo!! I agree.
Dan: Please don't demean yourself by engaging with this small-minded, backwards little man. Fight the fights that are worth fighting. You are, as any sane person understands, more of an expert, more well-argued, and above this unwinnable feud. You make yourself look less credible when you engage. Knock it off.
Dan: Please don't demean yourself by engaging with this small-minded, backwards little man. Fight the fights that are worth fighting. You are, as any sane person understands, more of an expert, more well-argued, and above this unwinnable feud. You make yourself look less credible when you engage. Knock it off.
53
King David's sin wasn't sleeping with hundreds of women. It was sleeping with another man's wife. Sleeping with a prostitute wasn't a problem (prostitutes were often heroines in the Hebrew Bible, such as Rachav in the Book of Joshuah, Tamar pretended to be a prostitute so that her dead husband's line wouldn't die out). Oh, and King David getting her husband killed so he could marry her, that was a pretty shitty thing to do as well.
54
@53, Not that King David ever actually existed, right Gitai?
But your point's well made. If we're looking to the bible for lessons in "morality" we're all in serious trouble...
But your point's well made. If we're looking to the bible for lessons in "morality" we're all in serious trouble...
57
It's ironic Old Testament biblical rules are being used to define what's kosher in a homosexual relationship. If we're going by those rules, shouldn't we step back a few thousand years?
Dan, you're distracting from thoughts of my partner with someone else. I hope those aren't a crime!
Dan, you're distracting from thoughts of my partner with someone else. I hope those aren't a crime!
60
"Sorry, David, but monogamy isn't natural"
Yeah! that's why it takes three to procreate. Gender doesn't matter of course... And an orgy of five individuals assures the birth of twins.
The above is basic knowledge only in the minds of those who promote an anything goes marriage way of life or as some like to call it marriages that are not "strictly monogamous", in a failed attempt to redefine what they're doing.
I often wonder, are there people out there who truly believe this? or maybe they think there's no difference between humans and some animal species.
All those who have such contempt for marriage, should stop for a moment and think to themselves, If you know that you can't be monogamous, then what's stopping you from living your life as you see fit? Have as many partners as you want. Why do you need to get married?? Is it out of spite? Is it just to prove that you can do it. To show your middle finger to society? Marriage is not a game. Why should any kid have to witness that? Be all non-strictly monogamous all you want, but don't take lightly, bring down the institution of marriage for all others who want to preserve it.
Yeah! that's why it takes three to procreate. Gender doesn't matter of course... And an orgy of five individuals assures the birth of twins.
The above is basic knowledge only in the minds of those who promote an anything goes marriage way of life or as some like to call it marriages that are not "strictly monogamous", in a failed attempt to redefine what they're doing.
I often wonder, are there people out there who truly believe this? or maybe they think there's no difference between humans and some animal species.
All those who have such contempt for marriage, should stop for a moment and think to themselves, If you know that you can't be monogamous, then what's stopping you from living your life as you see fit? Have as many partners as you want. Why do you need to get married?? Is it out of spite? Is it just to prove that you can do it. To show your middle finger to society? Marriage is not a game. Why should any kid have to witness that? Be all non-strictly monogamous all you want, but don't take lightly, bring down the institution of marriage for all others who want to preserve it.
61
@56 Infidelity is an aspect of marriage in general, except perhaps, those marriages where there is a certain degree of openness, in which case, the notion of infidelity may have no meaning.
Why do you ask?
Why do you ask?
62
ohhh yay, that @ 60, the batshit peanut from the gallery joins the fun. as if there wasn't enough nuttery. W0oT.
63
@55, at what point do you tell your children that your monogamous? I don't think you do.
Any child that asks deserves an honest answer, but I'm not about to spring forth and ask my mom if she's had some cock on the side. I can't think of any child that would. It's her life, her body, her relationship.
Any child that asks deserves an honest answer, but I'm not about to spring forth and ask my mom if she's had some cock on the side. I can't think of any child that would. It's her life, her body, her relationship.
64
@60 - what does one particular marriage have to do with another particular marriage? People marry for many reasons. The template of the "traditional marriage" is one of a 50% failure likely due to people not being happy. People will do what they feel they need to do to be happy and I read in the US Constitution that they have the liberty to do so.
65
LOL @ Sloggers taking offense to non-threats online. Hey how does Marlee Ginter, that goatfucker feel about all this!
Spare me the internet lawsuits plz, @44, 45, 46
Spare me the internet lawsuits plz, @44, 45, 46
67
Klinghoffer is going to put the strawman factory out of business. Who needs satirical caricatures when you've got a transparently closet-case morally anxious sanctimonious misogynist self-loathing comically self-unaware freak like him in real life?
And I don't want to put anybody down for having gayface, but it's a fact that some guys have it — and Klinghoffer is one of them.
And I don't want to put anybody down for having gayface, but it's a fact that some guys have it — and Klinghoffer is one of them.
68
64 Perception, that's why those who don't like it want to have now a legal right to enter it. If they succeed it will give those that come after us the wrong idea of what marriage is and soon enough marriage itself will be discarded. That's whats really at play here (the destruction of marriage) by those who seek marriage while at the same time not being willing to commit to one individual but instead remain doing what they did when they were bachelors. I believe it all comes down to knowing yourself first, if you know that monogamy isn't for you then why get married? Live your whole life as a bachelor or if you want to partner with another individual and have sex with others, fine, do so but why someone like me who has invested so much time, effort and care in my marriage has to have it now made a mockery and compared to others who obviously don't believe in it (marriage). Take away the same social recognition and disparage it by saying in the end both with actions and words (books) that they think such an instituion, such a commitment is outdated. People will end up not taking marriage seriously, and at a time when marriage itself is on shaky grounds the last thing we need is to open the door to people who are going to water it down even further.
69
Dan, the monogamy issue is one of very few I disagree with you on. I believe it is possible and should be expected in a relationship.
HOWEVER...
I also believe that I don't have the right to impose what I see as moral on anyone else. As long as any...outside relationships are cool with both partners, well, it's between them and whatever (if any) higher power they hold to. I have too many logs in my own eye to point out the speck in anyone elses.
HOWEVER...
I also believe that I don't have the right to impose what I see as moral on anyone else. As long as any...outside relationships are cool with both partners, well, it's between them and whatever (if any) higher power they hold to. I have too many logs in my own eye to point out the speck in anyone elses.
70
@68 if the commitment in marriage is simply to not have sex with anyone else your entire life, it's an empty sacrament. The commitment that lies at the heart of marriage involves partnership - the basic human characteristic/need that falls between individuality and community. The two person model happens to be particularly successful, but the variety of ways that it expresses itself are manifold, and each should be encouraged by the government as beneficial to the society as a whole.
Sometimes that partnership involves a life together that may or may not include children, sexual partners from outside the marriage, or sex AT ALL. Couples that hardly see each other get married, and some get married and go off into the woods to be completely alone with each other. Some people's grandparents get married because they want to die with a partner, even if they can't have children. Lesbians are lucky enough that they have the opportunity to at least carry their child. Gay men have to make do with a surrogate.
But they should every one of them be allowed to marry because that partnership IS a basic human characteristic, whether it manifests between man and man, woman and man, or woman and woman.
Sometimes that partnership involves a life together that may or may not include children, sexual partners from outside the marriage, or sex AT ALL. Couples that hardly see each other get married, and some get married and go off into the woods to be completely alone with each other. Some people's grandparents get married because they want to die with a partner, even if they can't have children. Lesbians are lucky enough that they have the opportunity to at least carry their child. Gay men have to make do with a surrogate.
But they should every one of them be allowed to marry because that partnership IS a basic human characteristic, whether it manifests between man and man, woman and man, or woman and woman.
73
And, LC, if marrige IS on shaky ground, surely that has more to do with straight people than with gays? After all, gay people have only recently been allowed to get married in a few states......and I keep pointing out that gay marriage has been legal in Canada since 2005 ( since 2003 in a few states) and the social fabric has held together quite well. So the problems that you foresee haven't arisen - straight people are still getting married and taking marriage as seriously as the gays.
74
@31 yes, I get my husband's permission to sleep with other men. Our relationship is built on honesty. I don't do things behind his back, and he doesn't do things behind mine.
@33 it's never come up, but I would expect the married man to have permission as well.
You assume that because I have sex with other men, I'm irresponsible and thoughtless, but I'm not.
@33 it's never come up, but I would expect the married man to have permission as well.
You assume that because I have sex with other men, I'm irresponsible and thoughtless, but I'm not.
75
Loveschild 60
"Sorry, David, but monogamy isn't natural"
"Yeah! that's why it takes three to procreate. Gender doesn't matter of course... And an orgy of five individuals assures the birth of twins."
LC, that's one of your greatest hits of stupid comments.
"The above is basic knowledge only in the minds of those who promote an anything goes marriage way of life or as some like to call it marriages that are not "strictly monogamous", in a failed attempt to redefine what they're doing."
What are they doing, exactly, that so upsets your boat? Living their lives? Not your business.
"I often wonder, are there people out there who truly believe this? or maybe they think there's no difference between humans and some animal species."
Humans *ARE* an animal species. Look it up.
"All those who have such contempt for marriage, should stop for a moment and think to themselves, If you know that you can't be monogamous, then what's stopping you from living your life as you see fit? Have as many partners as you want. Why do you need to get married?? Is it out of spite? Is it just to prove that you can do it. To show your middle finger to society? Marriage is not a game. Why should any kid have to witness that? Be all non-strictly monogamous all you want, but don't take lightly, bring down the institution of marriage for all others who want to preserve it."
No, it's not out of spite. Let's pull the word "marriage" out of the argument. Let's call it "equal rights," which is what it is.
Why are you so afraid of gay people getting the same rights as you? Because that's what it comes down to. It has NOTHING to do with marriage.
"Sorry, David, but monogamy isn't natural"
"Yeah! that's why it takes three to procreate. Gender doesn't matter of course... And an orgy of five individuals assures the birth of twins."
LC, that's one of your greatest hits of stupid comments.
"The above is basic knowledge only in the minds of those who promote an anything goes marriage way of life or as some like to call it marriages that are not "strictly monogamous", in a failed attempt to redefine what they're doing."
What are they doing, exactly, that so upsets your boat? Living their lives? Not your business.
"I often wonder, are there people out there who truly believe this? or maybe they think there's no difference between humans and some animal species."
Humans *ARE* an animal species. Look it up.
"All those who have such contempt for marriage, should stop for a moment and think to themselves, If you know that you can't be monogamous, then what's stopping you from living your life as you see fit? Have as many partners as you want. Why do you need to get married?? Is it out of spite? Is it just to prove that you can do it. To show your middle finger to society? Marriage is not a game. Why should any kid have to witness that? Be all non-strictly monogamous all you want, but don't take lightly, bring down the institution of marriage for all others who want to preserve it."
No, it's not out of spite. Let's pull the word "marriage" out of the argument. Let's call it "equal rights," which is what it is.
Why are you so afraid of gay people getting the same rights as you? Because that's what it comes down to. It has NOTHING to do with marriage.
76
Read his first book and you'll find that he circumcised himself three times to reach the level of Judaism he's at today. If that ain't batshit crazy, I don't know what is. And of course you have to blame his publishers for encouraging him to write more crazy ass books.
77
#68, if I were you, I wouldn't admit in public that my marriage is based on nothing more than sexual exclusivity. Those of us with marriages based on mutual love, trust, and a desire to build a family together might start feeling sorry for your wife or husband.
79
Oh I love this, Dan. Another of those non-monogamous marriages. Bet you're "evolved" enough to get past the jealousy thing, eh?
But what's it like when you're alone with your thoughts, and those thoughts are of nothing but your man getting plowed by someone else?
Not fun, right? But I guess it's worth it to be on the cutting edge...
But what's it like when you're alone with your thoughts, and those thoughts are of nothing but your man getting plowed by someone else?
Not fun, right? But I guess it's worth it to be on the cutting edge...
80
In terms of biblical law, the whole "one husband one wife" thing came about relatively late (as Dan correctly points out). Of course, what lots of people don't admit is that, up till a point, people kept rewriting all of these famous sacred texts, leaving things out and adding bits and generally updating things. (If you don't believe me, read up on the Red Sea Scrolls and the findings of scholars.) Moreover, law ≠ ethics ≠ religion, so "what's legal" and "what my religion says I should do" is NOT always the same as "what's ethical". Most religions (or denominations/schisms/offshoots) have rules that are simply retarded, but not all religious people implement every ridiculous rule. (If my children don't respect me, I must take them outside of down and stone them? Really?)
Any "design for life" that requires people to ignore/deny basic facts of what it means to be human, or of human flaws and weaknesses, is doomed to fail, and to cause a great deal of misery in so doing. If you want to be a moron, fine. But don't expect me to be a moron to keep you company.
Any "design for life" that requires people to ignore/deny basic facts of what it means to be human, or of human flaws and weaknesses, is doomed to fail, and to cause a great deal of misery in so doing. If you want to be a moron, fine. But don't expect me to be a moron to keep you company.
81
You assume that because I have sex with other men, I'm irresponsible and thoughtless, but I'm not.
I'm just a slut.
With a heart of gold ; )
I'm just a slut.
With a heart of gold ; )
82
Dan is right, infidelity is a 'pressure valve' that allows some long-term relationships to last.
Some individuals are not desirable enough to hold on to a long-term partner, allowing the partner to stray at will is seen by some as better than having no partner at all.
This is especially true in the body image obsessed male homosexual culture where a man's stock starts plunging once he hits 40.
Some individuals are not desirable enough to hold on to a long-term partner, allowing the partner to stray at will is seen by some as better than having no partner at all.
This is especially true in the body image obsessed male homosexual culture where a man's stock starts plunging once he hits 40.
83
He'll never get it Dan. The man argues that homosexuality is a choice, but yet straight men can't choose to not cheat on their wives because of us? Huh?
84
Oh Frank @79, you really don't get it. Sit down, honey...this might be hard for you to hear. Some people get off on freedom and honesty. I know it is scary, but it is true.
85
@81 Again, you assume things about me.
But ya know what, you've probably had a sex with more people than I have.
But ya know what, you've probably had a sex with more people than I have.
86
Have you ever noticed the doom and gloom crowd are never correct. Never. This "world is doomed" if you don't do what we say is so phony and manipulative.
87
Of course it's not natural. Because natural means twisted. The point of everything is to get in touch with the supernatural -- to escape this depraved world by connecting with T. S. Eliot's "Hanged Man" (i.e. the one who somewhere else on this blog was asked to suck something) and take as many as possible with us to a new place where "natural" doesn't mean twisted -- before the fire comes down here.
88
I've been with my wife for nearly 15 wonderful years (since we were 17!), and I'm here to tell you that it is possible to have a loving, pasionate, and respectful long term relationship, AND to be non-monogomous.
@3 Our marriage vows didn't include anything about monogomy
@60 everyone has their own definition of marriage. You condem my open marriage, and Dan's homosexual marriage. But know this; there are people out there who condemn your idea of mariage as hopelessly permissive and depraved too, (e.g. arrainged mariages, man as the "lord of the house" types, and so on).
@swinging lady: Hey you sound like my type (guiltlessly, honestly, and ethically non-monogomous). Shoot me an email, and maybe we can have a drink! sl.3.ohthetrees@spamgourmet.com
@3 Our marriage vows didn't include anything about monogomy
@60 everyone has their own definition of marriage. You condem my open marriage, and Dan's homosexual marriage. But know this; there are people out there who condemn your idea of mariage as hopelessly permissive and depraved too, (e.g. arrainged mariages, man as the "lord of the house" types, and so on).
@swinging lady: Hey you sound like my type (guiltlessly, honestly, and ethically non-monogomous). Shoot me an email, and maybe we can have a drink! sl.3.ohthetrees@spamgourmet.com
89
Klinghoffer's hysterical wankery over the 'shocking revelation' of Dan's non-monogamy reminds me of similar hysterical wankery emerging from the mouth of Peter LaBarbera on the same subject. I believe Peter found Dan's comments on permitted extra marital activity being good for preserving marriage and therefore good for children, particularly egregious, and envisioned a scenario in which a philandering male attempts to convince his wife that he's just got to cheat on her 'for the sake of the kids'. Like Klinghoffer, LaBarbera cannot envisage the real-life existence of a happily non monogamous female who initiates a open relationship, despite much evidence that many such women do exist. I suspect that the vast majority of women find these men's boorish stereotyping of women as clingy, Harlequin romance types who inevitably break down in sobs at the news of a male partner's infidelity far more insulting than any endorsement of non-monogamous relationships by Dan or anybody else.
90
That guy is such a douche, he always deletes any comment I make if I say the words "hell, ass, prick, queer" he fucking deletes it. WOW. I posted my opinion like 5 times in a row and if he deletes it again, oh well.
91
"Allowing for some outside sexual contact—being realistic and successfully negotiating some degree of openness—defuses one of the leading causes of divorce. It's pro-marriage, pro-stability, pro-family."
I agree. No one wants a jealous fish wife who freaks out every time a PYT in a bikini or short skirt passes by or gives a friendly gesture. No woman wants a jealous husband, and it is well known that unhealthy envy can cause abuse both for men and women. I point out cute girls and guys to my man and he just laughs and does the same. Of course, we also pick out goofier or more bizarre folks for the lulz. Its just silly to get caught up if you are serious. Crushes and flings come and go, but a partner is lifelong and has no need to worry unless its just not meant to be.
I agree. No one wants a jealous fish wife who freaks out every time a PYT in a bikini or short skirt passes by or gives a friendly gesture. No woman wants a jealous husband, and it is well known that unhealthy envy can cause abuse both for men and women. I point out cute girls and guys to my man and he just laughs and does the same. Of course, we also pick out goofier or more bizarre folks for the lulz. Its just silly to get caught up if you are serious. Crushes and flings come and go, but a partner is lifelong and has no need to worry unless its just not meant to be.
92
For most hetero couples in an open relationship, the woman gets laid a lot more. "Hi, would you like to have commitment free sex with me knowing I love anotherand this doesn't even have the fun of sneaking around?" It works better on men than women.
93
91 -- you're fat, right?
You're fat. And you've adjusted to the best you can get so well that you actually believe yourself.
You're fat. And you've adjusted to the best you can get so well that you actually believe yourself.
95
chubby chasers creep me out ...
The irony is that they seem to objectify women more than normal guys.
AND THEY WON'T SHUT UP ABOUT THE WOMEN THEY SLEPT WITH.
Day and night, on the prowl ...
christ.
In defense of nonmonogomy. In a lot of respects, i'm a rather modest guy with a jelousy streak. I couldn't handle an open relationship. I wouldn't be enthusiastic about sharing my beautiful wife (whoever she may be). I woulnd't be enthusiastic of having myself compared or risk losing my wife to someone else. I also don't want to open the relationship up, so my wife could tramp around, while I'm more or less alone. I troll the internet, mostly because science is an isolating environment I work in. I know I'm not "unattractive" but still, no strings attached sex ... WAY WAY WAY more accesable for women than men. Unless you are really willing to lower your standards and/or crush some hearts.
With that said, that would most likely be the first decade of marriage. If it makes it that long, then there has got be comfort level and trust that has got to be built up more than a simple level of trust. Maybe after a decade, we could be confident in our commitment that a certain level of openness would make sense.
Even at that, life goes on. There is more to life than sex. It would be a beautiful world if we could wake every day and fuck each others brains out, but society needs to function. We need jobs, we need food, we need to see our friends and family, and tend to the children (if we even want them.) I don't see society planning the neighborhood/company orgy every weekend any time soon.
The irony is that they seem to objectify women more than normal guys.
AND THEY WON'T SHUT UP ABOUT THE WOMEN THEY SLEPT WITH.
Day and night, on the prowl ...
christ.
In defense of nonmonogomy. In a lot of respects, i'm a rather modest guy with a jelousy streak. I couldn't handle an open relationship. I wouldn't be enthusiastic about sharing my beautiful wife (whoever she may be). I woulnd't be enthusiastic of having myself compared or risk losing my wife to someone else. I also don't want to open the relationship up, so my wife could tramp around, while I'm more or less alone. I troll the internet, mostly because science is an isolating environment I work in. I know I'm not "unattractive" but still, no strings attached sex ... WAY WAY WAY more accesable for women than men. Unless you are really willing to lower your standards and/or crush some hearts.
With that said, that would most likely be the first decade of marriage. If it makes it that long, then there has got be comfort level and trust that has got to be built up more than a simple level of trust. Maybe after a decade, we could be confident in our commitment that a certain level of openness would make sense.
Even at that, life goes on. There is more to life than sex. It would be a beautiful world if we could wake every day and fuck each others brains out, but society needs to function. We need jobs, we need food, we need to see our friends and family, and tend to the children (if we even want them.) I don't see society planning the neighborhood/company orgy every weekend any time soon.
96
But what's it like when you're alone with your thoughts, and those thoughts are of nothing but your man getting plowed by someone else?
It's just like my favorite sexual fantasies, actually! :-)
It's just like my favorite sexual fantasies, actually! :-)
97
I'd like to point out two things for the sake of this conversation:
1. Dan has made it a point to say, on MANY occasions, that monogamy CAN work and that he DOESN'T think all committed relationships should be open. Just the ones that need to be.
2. While I'm sure gay couples in general are more likely to do the open thing, it's by no means a rule; my husband and I have an open relationships, while all the gay couples I know are exclusive sexually (and can't understand how we do what we do).
1. Dan has made it a point to say, on MANY occasions, that monogamy CAN work and that he DOESN'T think all committed relationships should be open. Just the ones that need to be.
2. While I'm sure gay couples in general are more likely to do the open thing, it's by no means a rule; my husband and I have an open relationships, while all the gay couples I know are exclusive sexually (and can't understand how we do what we do).
98
Dan, don't fall into this trap. I never heard of Klinghoffer before you linked to him here. He is not nearly well known as you and not as successful from what I can tell. I think he trying to ride your coat tails to fame. Don't oblige him
99
Dan, looks as though you are not the only one to pick up on this guy's story.
A friend of mine just alerted me to this being covered at: Jezebel.com
http://jezebel.com/5306546/author-asks-i…
Looks as though David is getting the same reception as from Slog Bloggers.
A friend of mine just alerted me to this being covered at: Jezebel.com
http://jezebel.com/5306546/author-asks-i…
Looks as though David is getting the same reception as from Slog Bloggers.
101
How did people miss this?
The reason why people insist on getting "married" even though they don't want to enter a "marriage" as defined by a church or someone else is that "marriage" has become a legal institution necessary to people of a number of different prerogatives. I am glad to live in a place where domestic partnership is open to everyone and confers almost all the rights of marriage on the happy couple (yes, even tax benefits, and health benefits if you work for the District), but federal law does not recognize this and other states don't recognize this and so if I were to move or have a large estate or work for the federal government my partner would not receive all the same benefits as he would if we were married. (Aside: I am not yet domestically partnered, but hope to be some day!)
Get religion out of the government's definition of "partners" and the state out of whatever churches want to do and I, for one, will shut up and be happy and stop insisting on infringing on your right to be "married" under your own rules.
Oh yeah, and I'm monogamous. I don't get jealous, but I *also* don't have the time or energy for more than one partner. As for the BF, well, there was something about "I get more than my manwhore friends, what's to complain about?" ;) Given that he's honest and smart and responsible, if he wanted some variety we could probably work that out.
Finally, I just have to say that if people didn't take "traditional marriage" to an extreme, they would be a lot happier and possibly less likely to cheat. I don't have time for more than one partner because I have a career, friends, hobbies, interests, and personal distractions that I like to indulge in once in a while. Meanwhile, my married friends sit at home and stare at the TV all evening (not that there's anything wrong with that if you really love TV, but these people are channel surfing and complaining that nothing's on). Moreover, as a number of commenters have noted here (mostly in the most offensive ways), a lot of people get married to make them feel better about themselves. More stable and secure and less lonely. Boy, if there wasn't a worse way to live your life! If you enjoy yourself and your personal time, you don't need someone else there with you. Please don't take this as bashing the polys here...nothing wrong with that, just pointing out that many people who "cheat" (which is qualitatively different from "being open") aren't happy with themselves.
More...
The reason why people insist on getting "married" even though they don't want to enter a "marriage" as defined by a church or someone else is that "marriage" has become a legal institution necessary to people of a number of different prerogatives. I am glad to live in a place where domestic partnership is open to everyone and confers almost all the rights of marriage on the happy couple (yes, even tax benefits, and health benefits if you work for the District), but federal law does not recognize this and other states don't recognize this and so if I were to move or have a large estate or work for the federal government my partner would not receive all the same benefits as he would if we were married. (Aside: I am not yet domestically partnered, but hope to be some day!)
Get religion out of the government's definition of "partners" and the state out of whatever churches want to do and I, for one, will shut up and be happy and stop insisting on infringing on your right to be "married" under your own rules.
Oh yeah, and I'm monogamous. I don't get jealous, but I *also* don't have the time or energy for more than one partner. As for the BF, well, there was something about "I get more than my manwhore friends, what's to complain about?" ;) Given that he's honest and smart and responsible, if he wanted some variety we could probably work that out.
Finally, I just have to say that if people didn't take "traditional marriage" to an extreme, they would be a lot happier and possibly less likely to cheat. I don't have time for more than one partner because I have a career, friends, hobbies, interests, and personal distractions that I like to indulge in once in a while. Meanwhile, my married friends sit at home and stare at the TV all evening (not that there's anything wrong with that if you really love TV, but these people are channel surfing and complaining that nothing's on). Moreover, as a number of commenters have noted here (mostly in the most offensive ways), a lot of people get married to make them feel better about themselves. More stable and secure and less lonely. Boy, if there wasn't a worse way to live your life! If you enjoy yourself and your personal time, you don't need someone else there with you. Please don't take this as bashing the polys here...nothing wrong with that, just pointing out that many people who "cheat" (which is qualitatively different from "being open") aren't happy with themselves.
102
I can define my relationships any way I see fit. It's between me and my partner and is uninfluenced by your personal paradigms and arbitrary morality, Klinghoffer.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Slog Somehow Overlooked... by Dan Savage
-
VivaVulva Viagra! by Dan Savage -
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Health at Every Size by Dan Savage
-
"Let his days be few... Let his children be fatherless and his wife a widow." by Dan Savage
-
Feeling Sorry for Carrie Prejean by Dan Savage
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
Last Night's Colbert Report by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (102) RSS