After I stuck a sexual fantasy of my own into the column — Brad Pitt coming all over Ashton Kutcher’s face — a reader suggested that I devote an entire column to my readers’ sexual fantasies. I decided to have a sexual-fantasy contest, with prizes going to readers whose sexual fantasies were selected for publication. After slogging through hundreds of e-mails from straight guys and lesbians who want to do Britney Spears, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Nicole Kidman and the Olsen twins, and gay guys and straight women who want to do the guy in the Dell Computer commercials, Russell Crowe, George Stephanopoulus and John Walker Lindh (in his clean-shaven, on-trial-for-his-life incarnation), I’ve concluded that other peoples’ sexual fantasies are boring. Reading about other people’s sexual fantasies is like listening to someone tell you about a dream he had last night; it’s dull. I would like to apologize to my readers for boring you with my sexual fantasy — Brad Pitt coming on Ashton Kutcher’s face — and I’m canceling the sexual fantasy contest. Sharing my own sexual fantasy was a mistake, the contest was a mistake, reading all of those e-mails was certainly a mistake. Instead of tossing good column inches after bad, I’m going to cut my losses and scrap the contest. But I love contests, so I’m replacing the sexual-fantasy contest with a bigger, better contest with bigger, better prizes. See if you can guess the nature of this contest as you read this week’s column ...
Q: I’m an 18-year-old-girl and I’m a virgin, and I want to find some random guy to have sex with. Is that wrong? —Pissed-Off Chick
A: Call it “narrow-minded,” “mid-Victorian,” “puritanical” or whatever may come to mind, but sex outside of marriage is unacceptable. What is wrong with going all the way? Aside from the moral issues, the best reason is this: It isn’t worth the risks. Sex outside of marriage is a bad bargain when you measure what you stand to gain against what you stand to lose. What are the gains? Popularity? Nonsense. The pushovers may get a flurry of attention, but it doesn’t last long. The word gets around, and soon the free and easy “make-out” has a rotten reputation.
Q: My son recently came out as gay. I’m from the city and I’ve known gay people, including some lovely couples, but my born-and-raised-on-the-ranch husband refuses to believe two men can form a lasting bond. He thinks all homosexuals are promiscuous and lonely, and he’s worried for our son. I’ve told him that not all gay people are like that. —Montana Mama
A: Unfortunately, we are just like that. One of the main features of homosexuality is promiscuity. It stands to reason. Homosexuals are trying to do the impossible: solving the problem with only half the pieces. We say we want sexual gratification and love, but we eliminate, right from the start, the most obvious source of love and gratification — woman.
Q: My girlfriend and I just had a baby and she’s breast feeding. We smoke pot. Will it harm the baby? —Chicago Couple
A: Like the answer to many other questions about marijuana, its effects on babies is unknown. But there is certainly a strong possibility it might be excreted in mother’s milk. Your baby is on a good trip anyway when at its mother’s breast, and marijuana probably won’t make it any better. There is possible harm with the use of any drug. Why take a chance?
Q: I’m a 21-year-old straight guy who has always been turned on by rough stuff — nothing extreme, just little bites, slapping her ass while I fuck her, holding her down while kissing. My current girlfriend doesn’t like rough stuff, which is fine. I don’t have to do it. But she tells me that I’m a sadist who hates women and says she’s going to break up with me if I don’t get into therapy. —Rough Stuff In Denver
A: The toughest problem Christians have with sex is how to feel about their own sexuality. In your case, a tinge of sadism can be a tolerable eccentricity if it is controlled. There is an enormous difference between a slight, seductive sadism, limited to playful skirmishes, on the one hand, and compulsively destructive sadism on the other. Playful sadism between sexual partners is controlled by love; the lover stops when the partner complains.
Q: I have a boyfriend of about three years now who is getting increasingly jealous and possessive, and developing little obsessions with guys I see at work during the day. There seems to be no deterring my boyfriend from his mistrust in me, despite the fact that it is unfounded. Is there a way to curb this behavior? —Jealous Boyfriend Troubles
A: Jealousy is a passion with which those most afflicted are least worthy of love. No couple should allow their associations to develop into an engagement and marriage if either one has any inclination to jealousy. It shows invariably a want of sufficient confidence, and that want of confidence, instead of being diminished after marriage, is liable to increase, until by the aid of imagination and wrong interpretation the home is made a hell and divorce a necessity. Jealousy is always the sign of weakness or madness. Avoid a jealous disposition.
OK, did you guess what the theme of this week’s column? That’s right, it’s plagiarism. In honor of poor Doris Kearns Goodwin and dumb ol’ Stephen Ambrose — two prominent historians caught up in twin plagiarism scandals — all of the answers in this week’s column were lifted from books of advice written by other people. (All of the questions were sent in by my readers.) Here’s how the contest works: The grand prize goes to the first person who can correctly identify all five of the writers whose work I plagiarized, and give me the name of the books I lifted these passages from: I will fly the grand prize winner to Las Vegas for a fun-filled weekend. I will put you up at the Bellagio, and I will personally join you in Las Vegas for a long weekend of gambling, hookers and booze, all of it on me. I’m offering such a grand grand prize because I’m confident that no one will be able to correctly identify all five of the writers whose work I’ve plagiarized — not even the braying jackasses at The Weekly Standard who exposed Ambrose and Goodwin. I’m so certain no one will win the grand prize, I’m going to offer a not-so-grand prize to anyone who correctly identifies four of the writers whose work I’ve passed off as my own. The not-so-grand prize winner will be flown to Reno, Nevada, “The Biggest Little City in the World,” for a fun-filled weekend on me. Finally, anyone who can correctly identify three of the writers gets a subscription to The Weekly Standard. If more than one person correctly IDs the writers I’m ripping off this week, one winner will be selected at random; the winner must live in the continental United States or Canada. The deadline for entering this contest is March 31, 2003, to give everyone plenty of time to do the research.Contact Dan Savage at [email protected]