Asked for Advice

In brief, my birthday was less than I hoped for, but I made some new friends, and am going to have a real party when I get to K.C.

In other, and more interesting news, I have applied to be an advice panelist for Out, Inc. It is just a little side thing, but I think as much as I love writing and being opinionated, it will be an enjoyable thing for me. Ihad three question I was given to respond to. I thought it might be interesting to see them and there responses, so I decided to post them. The letters are numbered with my response following.

1. I've been seeing a guy off and on for about six months and I've noticed a disturbing pattern happening. I'm extremely attracted to him and we spend a lot of time at each other's apartments. But I have noticed that he's not the cleanest person on earth -- in fact, his apartment is downright filthy. When we started dating, he kept his place clean, but now that it's been six months, he doesn't seem to be putting any effort into cleaning before I come over. I've made jokes about it and he's "come clean" to me that he's always been sort of a slob. He's said he'd work on it, but he doesn't seem to be making any effort. Now it's at the point where his dirty habits are starting to affect how I feel about him -- but see, I really like everything else about him. How should I proceed? Do I lay down the law? Or should I just try to suck it up? Remember, this is someone I have deep feelings for. Help!

Mr. Clean-

Cleanliness can be a brutal relationship killer without anyone realizing it. Props to you for addressing it now. I guarantee laying down the law is the single worst thing that you can do. If his mom couldn't control this, chances are you can't either. Trying to force a 180 causes anger and makes you remind the man you're sleeping with of his mother.

Chances are his messiness is centered around things he doesn't like to do or doesn't care about. Keeping things clean initially was probably to make you happy, but no one can pretend forever. Try not to fault him, but let him know it matters to you and maybe he will care a little more.

For things you simply can't deal with, encouraging him to make subtle changes may be the ticket. Speaking as a master of disorganization myself, changing a few small habits, or locations of key things (hampers, etc.) makes a big difference, especially when it's easier to stay neat than not. Small things are really what make big changes, and if you are helping him make progress instead of scolding him, he will respond better and give you more of the results you want.

2. I've been single for a while now, mostly because I'm choosy. However, one of my friends introduced me to a friend of his, and we really hit it off. He's everything I want -- smart, funny, charming -- and it's also the most amazing sex I've ever had. The bad news is this: As I continue to get to know him, it's become clear to me that he has slept with just about everybody I know. Look, I don't want to pass judgment on that, but I have to be honest ¿ there's a part of me that feels like he's a total slut. The good news is he says he's really into me, has acknowledged his "past," and says he wants to be monogamous with me. I really want to get behind that and trust him, but am wondering how I am going to get past this, you know? What if we're at a party and I realize that he's slept with half the people there?

Choosy-

Smart, funny, charming, and after everyone he's slept with he chooses you? Sounds like a big shot of confidence. Seriously, you can't always fault people for their past without cutting a lot of amazing people out of your life. And as a gay man, do you really think you're going to find someone good looking that hasn't had some measure of a "slut phase"? Most of us go through it and go on to have great lasting relationships. I would say that since he has been upfront with you, that's a good thing and you should trust him until he gives you reason not to. Think of it this way, he's been around the block, which means he knows what he's looking for. That kind of stability is hard to find.

If you can get over the trust issue but are still nervous, try this: Any time you find yourself facing someone at a party he slept with, remind yourself that you are the one that has your guy now. You're the one he's going home with tonight, and you're the one he wants. No better recipe for getting over something than a big old fashioned shot of ego.

3. I met someone recently and the attraction was immediate. Trust me -- on our first few dates, we couldn't even look at each other without feeling this urgent attraction. He's amazing, and we also have everything in common -- we just look at each other googley-eyed all the time. We've messed around a few times already and it's so passionate. But here's the problem: We're both tops. And I don't mean versatile tops, I mean we're both 100 percent top-tops. We've talked about this, but the issue does seem to have put up some sort of barrier between us. See, for now, it's fine and it's not a big deal. But if this relationship actually goes somewhere -- which I think it might -- this could become a really big deal. Do I end this now, or do I stick with it and try to work it out. And how the heck do I work this out?

Totally Top-

Your problem is certainly one that a lot of us have dealt with. Without defined roles, it is no surprise that you're going to find someone that doesn't take the role you're used to your partner taking. The good thing is that most gay men don't have to have anal sex to have an amazing sex life. Though the percentages vary, studies show that many guys don't like that kind of action, or simply don't prefer it, even with their long-term partners. The question you have to ask yourselves is can you be one of these couples?

It sounds like you both have a lot of fun together without topping one another. It doesn't sound like either of you are the type of guys who can only get off with anal sex. With such a great range of activities you can engage in together, you only have to ask if that's going to be enough. For a lot of guys it certainly can be. So long as you can continue pleasing each other, keep on trucking, and don't let yourselves get hung up on something that only is an issue in the hypothetical.

Too much like a conservative straight woman?

Well, the fact that I am sitting here writing this at Starbucks means that the jury is still out on the success of my birthday. Undoubtedly tomorrow will bring some sort of posting on the good or ills of my day.

I find myself at a point of reevaluating some of my long held beliefs. It started slowly, as I was time and time again confronted with friends that worked outside what I thought were the ideal ways to handle a relationship, but ended with a bang. I have been reading Dan Savage's new book, The Commitment. Like his previous The Kid, it is sort of a personal memoir about something he and his partner have experienced and how they dealt with it. When I read The Kid I was made aware of various problems in parenting, both in general and specifically as a gay man and had some very thought provoking moments as I read it. The same has held true with his most recent book.

There are lots of things that I am bound to think about, and I am sure that at some point I will get around to many of the other points in later writing, but right now, I have only one focus: monogamy, and lasting relationships.

I have always held the idea that a real relationship is one where monogamy is mandatory. No questions. When I dated Daniel, I was challenged to a degree in this belief, but in all of our time together, we really never had to confront it head on, so I pretty much was able to continue to float along with my opinion. Since that time, I have if anything strengthened this position, asserting that the only way to have a truly lasting and healthy relationship was to be 100% committed to each other and no one else.

Now a few friends who have known me well pointed out the fact that no matter what my opinion was in theory, and no matter how much I might not cheat, they were absolutely positive that my boyfriend cheating on me would not be a deal breaker. I am too forgiving and would rather have the relationship succeed than one night of weakness to destroy all we had built. They are probably right, but as of yet, I haven't had to test this hypothesis.

As I mentioned, several friends in long-term relationships that don't necessarily believe in monogamy have recently come into sharp conflict with my opinions. Some are to the point where I would simply get angry, feeling they were betraying themselves and whoever they were with. The angrier I got, the more I had to wonder if this wasn't a case of me using anger to hide the fact that in light of their success I was losing logical ground. I hate losing logical ground, and if I was indeed overcompensating with anger, this was a bad sign indeed.

Dan was the catalyst that ensured that I really had to come to grips with my real opinion on this. About halfway through the book, Dan has a chapter that he devotes entirely to sex with other people while you are dating someone. True to his consistently reasoned approach, he points out many different angles and uses several examples. Cutting as short as possible, he cites the Greeks, Romans, and Jonathan Katz, who says that monogamy is "one of the pillars of heterosexual marriage and perhaps its key source of trauma." In ancient times, the value of marriage was placed over that of monogamy, and in fact it was accepted that being with one person for the rest of your life, had everything to do with life commitment and little to with who you slept with. The evidence that people weren't designed to be monogamous and that any attempts to break our nature is pretty pointless. It's funny because in this instance, I feel like all the religious people that I despise trying to say that only in denying ourselves can we be "good." No better way to win me over than make me feel like I am acting like someone I hate.

Denying or trying to hide the fact that we are attracted to others is ridiculous. As Dan says, "It's impossible for two people to be all things to each other sexually, and the expectation that two people must be all things to each other- that they should never find another person attractive or act on that attraction-does a great deal of harm." Now Dan certainly isn't making a case for polygamy, permanent singlehood or stupidity. In fact, his case is presented in the only way that I ever would have been forced to reconsider myself: the fact that his case is for saving marriage.

As I mentioned, the ancients didn't have the same hang-ups we do. In fact, only in the last century or so has the idea of complete monogamy become so socially adamant. Strangely, Dan also points out the fact that the steady increase in divorce rates mysteriously starts at the same time. Coincidence? No such thing. So how is it that being with other people can save your relationship? Well, he conveniently gives 2 great examples. In both these examples (one gay, one straight) it is strong couples who are totally devoted to each other, but have set up the "rules" to which they can expand their sexual experiences without damaging their relationships.

1. Terry- (The rules here are less specific) They must be safe, not in any way endanger their child. They don't hang out in bars or do internet hookups, but if the right circumstances are met, "cheating" is allowed. The two examples he gives are three ways (obviously much more applicable in gay relationships) but implies that in the ten years they have been together there have been a few other circumstances outside of three ways.
2. Billy- "Should the opportunity arise or present itself in such a way that it can be taken advantage of discreetly, without doing emotional harm to the other person or endangering the other person, than either of us can take advantage of the opportunity." He goes on to gives 2 examples. One at a restaurant, where a woman outside was incredibly hot. Billy kept turning to look at her, and instead of getting enrages, his girlfriend teased him, telling him he was busted, and switched seats with him so he can have a better view. They "spare each other the trauma of pretending." Interesting. The more extreme example of this rule is with this woman at the bowling alley. He says, "If… I was out with some friends and Kelly was out of town or having a girl's night out, and Red over there and I hit if off and things proceeded as thing sometimes proceed, I could take advantage of the situation without guilt."

Both guys point out that they have these rules, and by allowing the freedom, neither couples have acted on it very often, but neither do they have to worry about the snide comments of "you were looking at so and so" or the heartbreaking revelation of cheating. In both these instances of course things like affairs would be deal breakers, and the ideas behind the rules is that they are there to strengthen the relationship not destroy it. Dan says that they've made their "desire for others a non-issue." He goes on to say that, "Indeed, as most heterosexual swingers report, the times we've had sex with other guys has actually enhanced our desire for each other. Far from tearing us apart, the times we've had sex with another person… have renewed and refreshed our intimate life. It's made our home more stable, not less."

I am forced to admit that he may be onto something. I know he isn't the first. He brings up so many other examples like the aforementioned swingers, etc. and of course there are all my friends that seem to make it work. Maybe it is society that is forcing us to take this narrow view, and maybe in this one instance I have allowed it to shape my own thinking, possibly to my detriment. Thank God for the ability to reevaluate our opinions and become smarter before we destroy ourselves.

Too much from too long

Yes, yes, I know a month is far too long not to have written something, and frankly I have had a lot to say, but for some reason it never made it to the "paper" so to speak.

First, let's get it out of the way. Last night was insane. I have finally connected with the HRC people in New York, realizing that I knew a great many of them from my years going to all the national stuff, which was nice. As my first real event, I attended the town hall that was held to talk about ENDA (the Employment Non-Discrimination Act). For those of you who haven't heard, the entire gay community seems to be up in arms at HRC for supporting a bill that provides coverage for the LGB community, but leaves out the T. In brief, let me say that HRC had little choice in the matter if they wanted to keep the relationship they have with the congress, and if they wanted to move towards full equality for all. In their mind, taking steps is the best and fastest strategy, and I agree.

Anyway, the town hall was held to help us disseminate information to the community at large, and try and answer any questions that they may have had. What it became instead was a pulpit-style bloodbath.

Most of the people that attended the event had no interest in a town hall to get information. They didn't ask questions, they attacked the panel with a barrage of rants. For the record, I don't call them rants because they were disagreements; I call them rants because they were mostly illogical, repetitive strings of words that accomplished nothing. I especially hated people that tried to use history on their side when clearly they didn't know what they were talking about, as out nation has time and time again proven that baby steps often net the most results in the end. I hope that some of those people left feeling better for having got some of their anger off their chests, because no one really left that room with more information on either side. I do want to commend the few people that were thoughtful and intelligent. They certainly weren't on our side, but they seemed generally interested in getting information so that their opinion was based in fact and not assumption. More than half of these thoughtful people were obviously students, which may say something. More and more I realize that age has very little to do with rationality or maturity.

Alright, enough of that. Last time I wrote, I mentioned that I finally made the move to New York. I am loving it. I have had some significant money issues, though that springs not from the move itself, but rather the general job market at the end of the year. The jobs that I was planning on taking are holding off till the beginning of the year, so for now things have been a bit tight. I am actually better off having moved, as my bills have surprisingly decreased a great deal being here. The only other effect that the money thing has had on me is that as of yet I still haven't really been able to delve into the social scene the way I would like to. Even my friends are sometimes hard to hang out with as most often we would go out to a bar or to eat, something I am doing a lot less of at the moment. Despite the fact that this one aspect of life here is still temporarily closed to me, I am so happy to be here. I wonder sometimes if I waited for too long to make this change.

One final thing that I want to mention was a new experience for me. For the first time in my life, I felt nostalgic. I was doing some scholarship work at Columbia University, and the moment that I was there, I felt strange. Not strange in a bad way by any means, but strange in the fact that the feeling was new. I realized after a while what it was, and was somewhat surprised that I had never experienced nostalgia before. Being at the school reminded me so much of Harvard I can't even explain it. Being there surrounded by beautiful old buildings dedicated to education while people walked swiftly from place to place seemingly overwhelmed with a drive to learn was something I missed without even realizing it. It has been over eight years now since I left Harvard, and I tell you I didn't realize till then how much I miss it. Even working at a university like that makes me feel good in ways that are still beyond my understanding.

New experiences are always a good thing in my book to have this one be such a good one, and at the same time for it to allow me to experience first hand something I hear about a lot but until now have never truly understood is a great thing.