creators home lifestyle web
Margo Howard


Mom Purloins the Diary Dear Margo: I found out last week that our 17-year-old high school junior is having sex with her boyfriend! First of all, I found out the wrong way: I snooped in her room and read her diary. Second, she would never admit to it, so my husband …Read more. The Bad Seed Dear Margo: I never thought I would write to an advice columnist, but here goes. I've been dating someone for about a year now, and we talk of marriage occasionally. He's ready for commitment and very gung-ho about us getting married, which is …Read more. Oh, and, Uh, By the Way... Dear Margo: I am soon to be 27 years old, and my only serious relationship ended a few years ago. In hopes of avoiding the standard meat market of dating, I'm considering registration with I've also had my share of casual relationships.…Read more. It Is in the Bible, but Not in the Stars Dear Margo: I have been dating a wonderful man for four months now. He is very kind and sweet in every way. We are much in love and happy together. There is only one problem: We are different religions. I am a Christian; he is agnostic. I have …Read more.
more articles

A Little Perspective, Please


Dear Margo: My best gay male friend recently admitted he's in love with a woman, despite dating men his whole adult life without any bisexual inclinations. I can handle this sudden revelation, but I am deeply hurt and feel betrayed that it took him months to reveal this information. We're extremely close and share the tiniest details of our lives. I noticed a behavior change several months ago and repeatedly asked him what it was. He always brushed me off.

He's since begged my forgiveness, but I can't move past the idea of his keeping this secret from me. I find myself so hurt that I can barely speak to him. And I'm not secretly in love with him. I'm gay, as well, and have no romantic interest in men. Where do I go from here? — Allie

Dear Al: What you are calling a betrayal I regard as a "sin" of omission. Your close friend chose not to tell you his news until now, and I frankly can't see why you're so broken up about this. I suggest you accept the fact that he kept this to himself for a while ... for whatever reason. Some things are worth a commotion; this is not one of them. — Margo, forwardly

The Luck of the Draw

Dear Margo: When I started playing poker, I always won. The first tournament in which I played, I came in first. I thought I must have some sort of gift or something. This streak lasted for three months, and then I started reading books and studying the game.

At one point, I played in what was the most important tournament of my poker career. Gavin Smith came to my local poker club, and I won a satellite to the tournament in which he was playing.

It was a big deal. I was steadily grinding about 13 hours a day and doing very well. I am not a donkey. I had the chip lead at every table I played. It was down to four tables, and long story short, I could have sat there and folded every hand and would have made it to the final table. Instead, I did the opposite and got involved in a hand I probably shouldn't have. I risked my entire stack and lost it all to someone on a flush draw. I was devastated and cried for weeks.

Ever since then, poker has seemed intimidating, and I haven't made it as far in tournaments as I used to. How is it that an inexperienced player like me could have done so well in the beginning, and then gone to hell? I had been able to tap into a certain rhythm and was able to trust my gut, but I seem to have lost that. Is there any way to move past this situation and re-embrace what used to come so naturally? Will I ever be able to dominate a room full of men again, or should I just give up and break up with poker for good? — Texas Hold 'Em

Dear Tex: I do not know whether you will ever dominate a room full of men again, but I do believe there is such a thing as beginner's luck. I had it when I first started to shoot skeet. Then it went away. Forever. I also started to study something I took pleasure in (symphonic music), but after I took a course, I was so busy parsing movements, etc. that it was no longer enjoyable. Perhaps this is what happened to you. Although I know people who love the game, it is gambling, and if you're on the fence about continuing, perhaps "breaking up with poker" is the emotionally and financially smart thing to do. — Margo, bluffing

Dear Margo is written by Margo Howard, Ann Landers' daughter. All letters must be sent via the online form at Due to a high volume of e-mail, not all letters will be answered.




70 Comments | Post Comment
He "brushed you off" because he wasn't ready to talk about it, and he wasn't ready to talk about it because he didn't himself understand what was going on and what the HECK was the matter with him. Instead of seeing this all about you-you-you, has it ever occured to you how confused he must have felt?

You "can't move past the idea of his keeping this secret from you'? What the hell is this, do you feel like he cheated on you or something? For someone who claims not to be "secretly in love" with him, you sure are acting jealous. And what's this about you being "gay, as well", but having "no romantic interest in men? What are you, asexual at the same time as being gay? Sorry, "sister", but you're not making sense.

Seems to me, on top of being understandably bewitched, bothered and bewildered, he may have been procrastinating lowering the boom to you because he was both anticipating and dreading your dramatic overreaction. Franky, I don't blame him, since it would appear he was right.

P.S.: Look. It happened to Elton John, it happened to your friend. Get over your PRECIOUS SELF, Mister Drama Bitch Queen.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Fri Dec 2, 2011 9:28 PM
LW1: I understand what you're going through.

I had a very close friend of mine, one who I talked to every day, I listened to her troubles all the time, helped her move out of a bad marriage... then suddenly, she springs life changing (for her) news on me one day. It's disarming. And in your case, it had to be even stranger, since you had a bond with your friend, because you are both gay, and now he's changed that dynamic as well.

I don't think you are reading here, but if I were to see you, I would tell you that this news is not the end of your relationship and I think that's what you are really afraid of. You are not bad for feeling this way, it is what it is!

Give your friend time and space right now, if this is hard for YOU to understand, can you imagine his turmoil? Be there when he calls. He's likely very confused right now and he needs a good girl FRIEND to lean on. He likely didn't tell you because of that confusion.... he's still trying to figure it all out himself.

(PS: Remember back to when you figured out you were gay yourself. Remember how scary it was for you to tell people? That's what is happening to your friend now, but kind of in reverse. He's still your friend, and if you are one to him, you'll prove that now by realizing that he needs you to be there for him now. Best of luck.
Comment: #2
Posted by: nanchan
Fri Dec 2, 2011 10:00 PM
Lise Brouillette
I think if you go back and read Letter # 1 again you might realize that you are making an incorrect assumption about the gender of the LW. The letter is signed Allie, and since many (most?) lesbians would use the term "gay" to describe themselves. Given those facts, I think is is safe to say the reason the LW is gay but has no interest in men would be because the LW is a female.
Frankly I think you owe the LW an apology for your rather hostile reaction which was based on your misunderstanding what they had written rather than anything they actually wrote.
FWIW, I agree with nanchan's take om the situation. It's hard to confide something this big to anyone, even someone you are extremely close to, if you are still not sure how to explain your feelings to yourself.
Comment: #3
Posted by: EMSd
Fri Dec 2, 2011 10:56 PM
LW2: The LW had a crisis of confidence, not the complete loss of interest Margo experienced as soon as something got challenging. I suggest that the LW start doing sudoku puzzles. Poker is all about deciphering patterns. Getting good at sudoku (cryptoquizzes, etc.) will put the LW's instincts and knowledge back into sync.
Comment: #4
Posted by: LouisaFinnell
Sat Dec 3, 2011 2:40 AM
LW1--"I can handle this sudden revelation, but I am deeply hurt and feel betrayed that it took him months to reveal this information." Why? Your friends, even your closest, dearest bestest friends, are not obligated to tell you everything. Your friend has obviously been struggling with his sexuality and just when he thought he had things all figured out, a wrench was thrown in the works. This is an issue requiring deep reflection and self-analysis. It's not something one's best friend will solve over a couple of glasses of wine. While I understand that you're hurt because you thought you and your friend shared everything, maybe it's time for you to do some deep reflection yourself to determine why you're so emotionally needy that you try to hijack your dear friend's inner turmoil in order to make it all about you.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Chris
Sat Dec 3, 2011 4:53 AM
Comment: #6
Posted by: Jpp
Sat Dec 3, 2011 6:06 AM
Comment: #7
Posted by: Jpp
Sat Dec 3, 2011 6:08 AM
Oh my...LW1. I have to agree with the rest of the crew. Can't see as he wanted to discuss his sex life with you before he had worked out whether this was just a fling or the real thing. Truth is he doesn't need to disclose EVERYTHING he is feeling or thinking. He sounds like he is being very toughtful and mature about his difficult situation. Sorry about you being called "Mister Drama Bitch Queen". That came out of thin air and was uncalled for.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Penny
Sat Dec 3, 2011 6:26 AM
Oh my...LW1. I have to agree with the rest of the crew. Can't see as he wanted to discuss his sex life with you before he had worked out whether this was just a fling or the real thing. Truth is he doesn't need to disclose EVERYTHING he is feeling or thinking. He sounds like he is being very toughtful and mature about his difficult situation. Sorry about you being called "Mister Drama Bitch Queen". That came out of thin air and was uncalled for.
Comment: #9
Posted by: Penny
Sat Dec 3, 2011 6:27 AM
I like Nanchan's take on this as well.

Cole Porter, who was indisputably gay, was also deeply in love with his wife, whom he considered the love of his life. Holly Near, the lesbian activist and women's music icon, is currently in a long term relationship with a man. The evidence increasingly suggests that sexual orientation is biological, and probably determined by hormonal exposure in the womb, rather than a hard and fast genetic imprint. It also seems most of us have some innate ability to be "flexible," but a strong pull in one direction or other could obscure that for most of one's life. And so many of the "straight" men I know have told me they'd gladly make an exception for David Bowie. Human sexuality is a SPECTRUM, not true/false or yes/no.
Comment: #10
Posted by: Carla
Sat Dec 3, 2011 6:30 AM
"Where do I go from here?" Well Allie dear, how about to the bathroom to soak your head under a spigot of cold water. It really isn't all about you and there is nothing to forgive. Your friend had feelings he wanted to keep to himself until he decided to tell you - which is his right. (I, too, realized Allie was a woman from the very first sentence - "my best gay male friend" - that's a distinction that a woman would make) Frankly, I think Allie is jealous of another woman having an important place in her "best gay male friend's" life.
Comment: #11
Posted by: Maggie Lawrence
Sat Dec 3, 2011 7:02 AM
I have to say based on what LW1 has written that she might consider her over the top reaction as a possible reason her friend didn't immediately tell her. If she has a history of overreaction the friend may have decided to wait until a. he was sure of what he was feeling since she states this is the first time he has been in love with a woman (obviously a huge revelation for him) and b. he knew that such a situation was going to prompt a lot of reaction from the other folks in his life, potentially negative reaction as well. I agree with other posters that it is unfortunate that this LW1 can't see past her own conceitedness (it isn't all about you honey) and just be happy that when he felt right, comfortable, etc about the situation he opened up to a person he thinks of as a good friend and say congrats. Instead she focused on we are such good friends and he didn't tell me everything. Well I want to know if the LW really tells him every little detail and feeling she has had in her life to this friend or did she keep something to herself its just human nature sometimes. And really ladies it always saddens me when we stoop to name calling and vulgar language, it shows a decided lack of creativity and sensitivity to each other and the LW's who have real problems.
Comment: #12
Posted by: Paula
Sat Dec 3, 2011 8:03 AM
LW1, is female, from all indications in the letter, and it would be nice if commenters would actually take the time to digest the provided information before spouting unnecessary judgement and nastiness. I also think she is a little jealous along the lines of...if he now is attracted to a woman, why wasn't it me? I think that at certain points in life, we can be very attracted to someone of either gender, no matter how sure we think we are in our sexual orientation. Some people have what I call "magic dust" on them seen only by us, and it leads to an intense attraction, right or wrong. Anyway, LW1, I do not think you are being honest with yourself. If you are jealous, admit it, at least for yourself, and if he is really a friend, be happy for him as he explores this adventure. No friend owes it to you to share every little thing, especially if the matter is something that is seriously causing him some angst and confusion. I just hope he doesn't string this woman along in vain, because as I said, I think unexpected attractions happen, but if he is really gay, a relationship with this woman could be a disaster for both of them.
Comment: #13
Posted by: Carly O
Sat Dec 3, 2011 8:29 AM
Re: EMSd

Well said, EMSd. Some people are in such a hurry to get on the stage, that they don't bother worrying about whether they are prepared, how nasty they are, or whom they hurt.

And LW's friend must be in a state of turmoil. As I said, I just hope he doesn't hurt the woman by being dishonest. We are all familiar with the story of women who think they can change a gay man, to no avail, and she doesn't deserve that pain.
Comment: #14
Posted by: Carly O
Sat Dec 3, 2011 8:37 AM
Regarding LW1, yes, it seems this is a lesbian friend reacting badly to the disclosure that her best gay male pal is suddenly somewhat bisexual, at least enough to be interested in one woman.

There's a lot of reasons why this might seem to be unsettling to the LW. Particularly because it's rather rare for an established gay man to suddenly have feelings for a woman, so it may be that (a) this new feeling is in reaction to some other pressure in his life, and it's not real attraction or (b) he's always been bisexual but kept that information secret until now.

Although it may be hard to understand, there's also a lot of "biphobia" in the gay community, and an established gay man "suddenly" become bisexual "out of the blue" may seem like someone backsliding from coming out of the closet, taking an easier route than standing his ground as a gay man. Clearly, being involved with a woman doesn't create the problems with bigotry that being with a man would, so "turning bi" can seem like "taking the easy way out".

Also, most gay men who are with women are doing it to "hide", and they don't "lose" their attraction to men; rather, they are using the woman to avoid abuse and hatred and to "fit in", and typically start to cheat on the woman with men. And they can't give a woman the same kind of love that a straight man could.

This is all pretty well known in the gay community, and fair or not, there are a lot of people who would take this news (Hey, you know how I've been sleeping with men for 20 years, well, I just kissed a girl and I like it!) with a huge amount of skepticism -- and frankly, the skepticism will, most likely, be deserved, as this kind of "experiment" almost always fails.

However...if he's always been bisexual, it could be that the ambiguity of being bi, and the disrespect that bisexuals often get from the gay community, may have put him in a different kind of closet, and he's just now coming out of it.
I doubt its jealousy triggering the LW's reaction; more likely, its a bit like feeling betrayed from a fellow comrade who also went through the "coming out" process but is now "backsliding". The struggle of being gay is something gay men and lesbians share; perhaps without that connection, she feels their friendship is at risk.

Either way, though, this isn't about her, and she should try to be more supportive of her friend, whatever his reasons are behind this announcement.
Comment: #15
Posted by: Mike H
Sat Dec 3, 2011 10:15 AM
Re: Mike H


As usual, a very thoughtful post. After reading what you posted, I have to agree that I was probably wrong about Allie being jealous. It is a little difficult for a heterosexual, long married woman to see things from Allie's point of view, so of course, I did a heterosexual woman thing and made it about sexual jealousy.

I thank you for your posts because they open my eyes to new ways of thinking. And of course, she should be more supportive of her friend.
Comment: #16
Posted by: Carly O
Sat Dec 3, 2011 10:23 AM
Re: Lise Brouillette

Fair notice Lise. I reported your post, and I really hate stirring this pot, but you need to learn, at minimum, reading comprehension. You go off on wild rants, vulgar language included, when you are completely wrong. "MISTER DRAMA BITCH QUEEN"? What is wrong with you? You really need to stop being so insulting and if you are really that unhappy with yourself, I hope you get some help. It is not healthy trying to get your self-esteem by slamming other people, especially when you do not take the time to read their comments and understand what is being said. I am still laughing about you claiming you are not a narcissist just because you have "too strong a stage presence" so they have to put you at the back of the stage. Spoken like a true narcissist victim.

Forgive me you all.....I just reached my boiling point with her nastiness.
Comment: #17
Posted by: Carly O
Sat Dec 3, 2011 12:50 PM
Re: EMSd
After reading nanchan's post, I realised I had taken for granted the LW was male and that I could be wrong. So I stand corrected about that part, and I'm sorry if I made a mistake.

The rest of it stands, however - this is not about him or her. As nanchan said, the LW (whatever the gender) ought to go back to his/her own souvenirs of how confused s/he felt when trying to figure him/herself out. If someone ought to know how baffled the friend must feel, it would be the LW... and the friend is in desperate need of support, and is getting a "what about me" tantrum instead. If there was an edit button on this thing, I would change the epiteth to "self-centred drama queen".

Perhaps it is possible that human sexuality be somewhat like being left or right-handed, in the sense that it is never 100% either way. It is also possible that we all have the innate ability to be flexible, like you suggest, but that the issue never arises for most of us because we never happen to meet one who could emotionally move us in an unexpected direction. Or a combination of both. Who knows?

@Mike H
On top of everything else you said, is it possible that this bi-phobia be about some gays being terrified of being confronted with the LW's friend's dilemma? After all, it would appear that virulent homophobia often hides ambivalent feelings about the hater's sexual identity... I see a parallel here.

@Carly O
There is nothing wrong with me, and I wasn't trying to be unnecessarily crude. "Drama queen", we all know about. "Bitch queen" is a well-known vernacular expression used to describe the kind of gay male who regularly performs a drama-queen, me-me-me hissy fit. As any gay male you happen to know can confirm.

"Bitch queens" are typically very much over-the-top flamboyant (male) gays, complete with exaggeratingly overstated fagotty manners and dramatic falsetto voices - on top of the diva behaviour. Pop star drag queens are the ultimate expression of this - think RuPaul and (in Montreal) Mado.

As someone who was classically trained as a singer and dancer and who supplies friperies and antique shops with period jewellery (three fields rife with bitch queens), you can rest assured that I've seen a LOT of those. I would assume you didn't know the term, and haven't been exposed to the ones it describes.

And let's be clear about one thing... they don't bother me one bit. I'm fine with them being dramatic and stereotypical to the point of caricature if this is what they feel represents them. In fact, I have several friends who are very, very bitch-queeny. One of them even manages to be macho at the same time!

I made a mistake about the LW's gender here... sorry about that. The term doesn't apply to gay females.

Comment: #18
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Sat Dec 3, 2011 3:21 PM
Lise: please never quote in me in a post of yours ever again, especially in the manner that you did above. You MISQUOTED me and that is wrong. I never used the word "souvenir" and I find that insulting to the LW, to gay people in general and definately to myself.

Please do not quote or paraphrase my posts again.

Comment: #19
Posted by: nanchan
Sat Dec 3, 2011 3:38 PM
Re: nanchan

No, you did not use the word "souvenir", and I don't remember using quotation marks... This may have to do with English being a second language for me, but please explain what is offensive about the word "'souvenir"?

Comment: #20
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Sat Dec 3, 2011 3:43 PM
Lise, did you perhaps mean "memories" when you said "souvenirs"? The word "souvenir" is related to "remember" in French, isn't it?
Comment: #21
Posted by: Kimiko
Sat Dec 3, 2011 4:28 PM
I am gay, have many gay friends (well, a few, plus a spouse). For the record, "bitch queen" woudl be considered offensive by us all.

I'm sure there is some rationalization about to be offered here, but honestly, stop digging deeper.

Some rap singers use the "n" word, but that doesn't make it inoffensive.

Or perhaps I should refer to some female posters as "skank ho"?

Comment: #22
Posted by: Jpp
Sat Dec 3, 2011 4:59 PM
Re: Carly O

I reported that post as well and now hours later it is still up here. hmm guess doesn't care about its own policies.
Comment: #23
Posted by: Paula
Sat Dec 3, 2011 5:19 PM
Re: Kimiko

Yes, it is, and yes, I did. What difference does it make? I don't remember "souvenir" being on the list of offensive terms for anyone...

As far as I've known for a few decades now, I'm not aware of the term being so offensive as being descriptive. Some would take exception to it of course, but some will derive deep insult from the most innocent things... I happen to know a few who are quite proud of being known as "bitch queens". I guess it's as Einstein said, everything is relative.

What I'm really trying to say here - as in everything else, someones's trash is somebody else's treasure.

Comment: #24
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Sat Dec 3, 2011 8:14 PM
Re: Lise Brouillette
In spite of your claimed familiarity with the gay community, you seem to lack basic compassion and the ability to censor your own comments. Clearly, you have issues with gay members of the community, considering your comments
""they" don't bother me one bit," "I'm fine with them," and referring to the demeanor and conduct of gays as "faggoty." The need to refer to others as "them" is a typical sign of discomfort to distance a group from oneself. For the record, I'm a married heterosexual woman, but your comments are clearly offensive and based on ignorance. Every gay family member and friend that I have would be offended by your comments. So, simply because you have business dealings with a specific group of people does not mean that you have understanding or social grace.
Comment: #25
Posted by: Samantha
Sun Dec 4, 2011 4:56 PM
Re: Samantha
Frankly, the fact that neither Chris nor (especially) Mike H have come down on me on this clearly indicates that they know where I'm coming from exactly. Particularly MikeH, with whom I have been discussing at length on a number of subjects at Delphi. He, better than many, knows I don't have a problem with gays - or bis or trans, or whatever. Reality remains what it is about bitch queens, however.

"Bitch Queen" is not generally a compliment... except for those who actually see it as a badge of honour to be as flamboyant as they possibly can. And no, it doesn't bother me. To each his own.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but you're viewing this from your own lens, which is not necessarily up-to-date. I don't mean that as a snark, BTW... everybody has some lens or other in dire need of refreshing.

Comment: #26
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Sun Dec 4, 2011 7:12 PM
You people are giving me a headache.
Comment: #27
Posted by: Julie Lindstrom
Mon Dec 5, 2011 3:34 AM
For most of these words, it really is a matter of context, Samantha. There isn't a single gay bar in America you couldn't go into and hear those words tossed around, often in a very "friendly/teasing" fashion.

A straight woman who spends time socializing with gay men would be exposed to these terms on a regular basis in a context that isn't insulting. It would be easy to pick up on those terms and automatically start using them oneself. It's happened to me more than once.

However, that isn't to say that I'm particularly thrilled that gay men use these terms on each other... I just understand that they aren't necessarily automatically offensive or insulting. I've never been particularly comfortable with the ease at which some gay men feminize other gay men... bitch, queen, mary, girlfriend... I think it's sometimes too much, and perhaps there may be some internalized homophobia involved in the practice. I'm also not happy with the frequent use of the gay slur "f----t" used by gay men towards each other.

But it would be a lie to suggest that such words aren't used in the community, and used *frequently*, and used in the presence of straight friends, especially straight female friends.

If we're really going to get upset when straight people use those words about us even in a non-insulting way, then we ought to clean up our own act first, frankly, and not so casually toss those words around about each other.

I do appreciate your sensitivity to this issue, though, Samantha, as it can indeed be a very touchy subject. Most of the time, though, even more than the words, you can tell by the tone. I *know* when someone is using the word "f----t" in a "I'm part of the community too" kind of way, and when they are using it because they are bigots who despise me. The difference becomes obvious pretty quickly.
Comment: #28
Posted by: Mike H
Mon Dec 5, 2011 5:46 AM
Mike: according to your own post, Lise's post 1 IS insulting.

You: "For most of these words, it really is a matter of context, Samantha"

Lise: "Get over your PRECIOUS SELF, Mister Drama Bitch Queen."

If Lise had said something in a kidding voice, and to someone she actually KNEW, like you, or Chris, the use of the term could be considered playful banter. But the term "Get over your PRECIOUS SELF" in and of itself is very insulting to a LW.

For someone who consistently self moderates the pages here at creators and consistently warns people to be nice because the letter writers may be reading and could be offended, Lise herself is the worst offender of all of us.

You riding to her defense because of your discussions at Delphi is kind of pathetic and sad. If Lise had a brave bone in her body, she would APOLOGIZE for the term and stop defending herself. it was an inappropriate post. I don't know, maybe Lise had a bad day that day, maybe she was hungry or tired, but it does NOT excuse her language and repeated bullying of anybody who disagrees with her, her language or her opinions.

She obviously asked you to come in and defend her, noble of you. I enjoy your posts usually, post 15 above was great and gave a wonderful perspective. But I would caution you about the company you keep.
Comment: #29
Posted by: nanchan
Mon Dec 5, 2011 7:18 AM
@nanchan, I'm sorry to say this, but you're really letting your personal issues with Lise cloud your judgement. First, you're dragging this more and more off-topic from the LW to focus on attacking Lise; second, you're jumping to conclusions, and are frankly wrong about what you call my "defense" above (which if you re-read isn't really much of a defense at all); and third, for someone who's made an incorrect guess about my motivation to then call my comments "pathetic and sad" is rather insulting -- which in turn makes your complaints about Lise being insulting a little hypocritical.

You say it's "obvious" that Lise asked me to defend her, but in reality she did no such thing. Where this is concerned, your judgement is "obviously" misfiring. Which is too bad, because you often can make insightful, on-topic comments... as long as Lise isn't your focus, apparently.
Comment: #30
Posted by: Mike H
Mon Dec 5, 2011 8:10 AM
Mike: I'm stopping this pathetic thing from my end with this.

Yes, I have an issue with ANYBODY who calls a LW a name, refuses to own up to a ridiculous post, and then goes to another site (not only today, but consistently) to beg for help to defend her ridiculous ego. Want proof? Lise writes: "Particularly MikeH, with whom I have been discussing at length on a number of subjects at Delphi. "

You know, Mike, I appreciate your opinions UNTIL you start coming to someone's defense with VERY little reason to do so. Other posters have come in overwhelmingly against her post. Even you yourself say that you don't agree with people using those terms, but stop short of judging one of your friends who obviously not only used the term, but did so in a malicious manner and with ill intent.

I lost a lot of respect for you, Mike, with your last post. Case closed on my end. I won't respond to you or Lise on this thread.

Comment: #31
Posted by: nanchan
Mon Dec 5, 2011 8:31 AM
@nanchan, that's an odd way to apologize for your making assumptions about why I posted, and for using insulting terms within your post towards me without basis.

You seem to feel very free to hold people to standards you yourself don't meet, apparently.

Consider the loss of respect mutual, nanchan. This is an incredibly disappointing response on your part.
Comment: #32
Posted by: Mike H
Mon Dec 5, 2011 10:59 AM
I think LW1's reaction is fear-based. After all, the only reason she probably shared her most intimate secrets with her friend was because she knew that there would never be any sexual tension. Now that he's "come out" as being able to feel attracted to women, she's probably all up in arrears about what he might have really felt for her all this time, even if he never made a move or gave any indication that he ever would. I've spent years in theater and see this all the time. I recently completed a show with a very small cast of six people, and limited space, and there was only one dressing room to be shared. There were only two other men in the cast besides me, both of them gay and partnered (not to each other). The women in the cast, I noticed they had no issue whatsoever if one of the gay guys made some comment about their boobs, but when I said something similar, it was obvious they were offended by it. Even though they were polite enough not to say anything, I could completely see it in their eyes and body language, and that was the last time I did it...though the gay guys continued such comments periodically and never got the "offended" reaction I did.

After that single remark, the youngest woman of the cast would make a point of walking out of my field of vision to change her shirt around the gay men's makeup table (even though her bra was perfectly modest). The other women were more realistic though and didn't worry about me.

If you ever saw the movie "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry", the way the girl behaves around the guys when she thinks they are gay and then totally flips when she finds out they aren't, is the complete truth.

The knowledge of a person's sexual orientation, regardless of how they actually behave, completely changes the way you act around them.
Comment: #33
Posted by: Paul W
Mon Dec 5, 2011 1:16 PM
RE: Lise FINALLY others are seeing Lise for what she is. She is mean spirited, unfairly judgmental and she thinks she is the column owner. Several months ago I had issues with her post and she started calling me a troll and getting others to do the same. This person has to make herself feel better by slamming others. I dont know why she thinks her post are the only right ones. I have also reported her post but nothing is ever done, so what does that mean? Lise, hey you know it all, please go away so others can have intelligent and mature conversations. You are indeed pathetic.
Comment: #34
Posted by: terri
Mon Dec 5, 2011 1:44 PM
Re: Paul W

"but when I said something similar, it was obvious they were offended by it."
Well, of course, if they're gay and you're not, then it is not perceived the same way and in fact, it is not the same. With gays, there is no need to be overly modest because there is no sexual tension.

Several times, I've seen Black people greet each other, "NEgro!" and laugh about it. There is no way I could do the same - they can say it, I can't. Not with my red hair, it wouldn't mean the same thing. Same song, second verse.

I think you may be on to something when you suggest her reaction may have been fear-based. It may be that, all of a sudden, she's afraid she can't treat him like "one of the girls".

Comment: #35
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Mon Dec 5, 2011 5:27 PM
Paul w2: you bring up an EXCELLENT point.

I had a close girl friend come out to me when we were about 20. Up until that time, we had been like any other two girl friends, we shared clothes, got ready for parties together, slept in the same bed after parties, talked about boys, sex... she was a close friend that I felt I could tell everything to. But after she came out to me (at 3 in the morning no less via a telephone call), the whole dynamic of the relationship changed.

Suddenly, she changed from being someone I could walk around in my bra in front of, like I would with my other girl friends and my sisters, to someone I had to put on a robe with (like I would with any guy). it wasn't that I was afraid she would hit on me, she didn't come out to hit on me, I think she came out because she was tired of living a lie and knew I would keep the "secret", it was just that I now viewed her in the same way that I viewed anybody who COULD be sexually attracted to me at all.

fantastic post: I agree it could be a part of the reason why the LW is so hurt. When people tell you that they have a different sexual orientation, it DOES change your perception of them. It doesn't mean that you think less of them, just it shifts the dynamic of the relationship. If a man comes out as gay to a woman, there is a MUCH different dynamic than when a man comes out as gay to another man. the two people will react differently: gay men are usually "safe" for women to hang out with, check other guys out with ("he's mine" "No he's MINE" ... oh the fun I've had with gay men checking out guys and trying to figure out which one of us they would find attractive!). For a man to come out to a straight man, it seems different (I don't know, I'm not male).

Again, fantastic post and great point!
Comment: #36
Posted by: nanchan
Tue Dec 6, 2011 6:40 AM
@Paul, @Lise, I'm not sure that this lesbian woman would have seen her gay male friend as "one of the girls" in quite the same way a straight woman would see her gay male friend.

An earlier post I tried to make seems never to have made it, but the negative reactions to bisexuality that I know of -- both from my own experiences and from discussions with a friend who is a bisexual community activist -- are usually one of two kinds: (1) trying to hide their essential gayness to be more comfortable in bigoted straight society or (2) not wanting to date a bisexual because of fear that they would dump you for a more socially-acceptable opposite-sex partner.

Also, a lot of us go through a "bisexual phase" as a way of easing into coming out of the closet fully: we're not really bi, but its easier to say that as we get used to our identity and gauge the reactions of friends and family. I did that myself, coming out as "bi" to close friends in my mid-20s but then coming out as gay to the world once I hit 30.

So... there's often a natural skepticism. And it can also be unsettling, because becoming comfortable with our sexual identities is much more of a process than it is for straight people. Sexuality isn't really given the same attention among straight friends, it isn't quite the same bonding process -- for us, we've all had to come out of the closet (or struggle with staying closeted), and we also have the same "fight" in terms of being a minority that doesn't have full equality yet.

This announcement threw a monkey wrench into their friendship, causing some uncertainty. The issue really seems to be that he didn't tell her, so she's worried about how "solid" the friendship is now. What she thought they had in common (being gay) is threatened, since bisexuals can indeed "pass" more easily in straight society, and if he dates a woman, he doesn't have to worry about holding her hand in public, whether they can get married, etc.

Friendship is based on shared interests and mutual respect, and grows through time and trust, and she sort of seems to think that this is all threatened because he was going through this process and kept it from her.

But, again, this struggle -- whether it's legit or not, whether he's dating a woman for the wrong reasons or the right ones -- is his, and yet she's making this about her.

Also... given the biphobia in the gay community, I wonder if she herself has ever said anything derogatory about bisexuals before. Maybe she's dated a bi woman who left her for a man (a common enough occurrence for many lesbians). It could be his reluctance to tell her is because he remembered she had negative feelings about being bi.

Maybe not, of course -- the basics here are that he has changed a part of their dynamic, a part of their connection, and she's more unsettled than expected by it. Perhaps just a little more time to get used to the idea, and a little more respect for the fact that this is about *him* and not her, will help her to see that the friendship doesn't need to change. (Heck, now that he's announced he also likes women, they actually have *more* in common, if she wants to think about it that way!)
Comment: #37
Posted by: Mike H
Tue Dec 6, 2011 11:22 AM
Thank you, Mike for recognizing my point about the dynamic! excellent to have s0ome reinforcement on that.

Comment: #38
Posted by: nanchan
Tue Dec 6, 2011 11:56 AM
Funny, my first thought about LW1 was that it was *her* he was in love with and he was testing the waters to see how she responded. Maybe I'm wrong as she doesn't indicate whether her BF mentioned names or not. And maybe, just maybe, she is reacting the way she is because she is in fact in love with him too but doesn't want to be hurt.

Either that or their gayness was truly the biggest thing they had in common and when he realized maybe he wasn't as gay as he once thought he didn't want to face her (obvious) wrath.
Comment: #39
Posted by: It's me
Tue Dec 6, 2011 1:16 PM
Lots of interesting discussion here about bisexuality and biphobia in the gay community. Believe it or not, I think this situation happens a lot more often than any of us want to admit, and the fallout can be brutal... especially from members of the LGBT community.
One thing I would add is that while the man in question may be 'technically bisexual', he may not identify that way and it would be wrong to automatically label him as such. I'm reminded of Russell T. Davies' character (based upon a real-life friend of his) who falls in love with a woman but adamantly retains his gay identity. There are other people who ultimately decide that they don't fit any labels at all.
The other thing I wanted to mention was the notion about bisexual men and woman being able to "pass" more easily (by virtue of being bisexual). This is a common little gem that people love to throw in our faces with the implication that bisexual people can pick and choose who they fall in love with. The truth is, we don't. We don't choose who we love; no one does. If I happen to fall in love with a member of the opposite sex, then yes, there's some social privilege there. But if I happen to be in a relationship with a member of the same sex (as I am now), then no, I don't get an automatic pass. It's situational, not innate. And the fact that I consider myself 'capable' of falling in love with a member of either gender (or no gender identity at all) does not mean that it will actually happen, that I need both in my life to be complete, that I am confused or jealous or "really gay" or "bi-curious" or any of the other negative stereotypes that pop into people's heads when they hear that B-word.
As for LW1, it seems a clear case of biphobia to me. There's a saying in our community that coming out twice lets you know who your real friends are. I hope this woman will open her eyes. It's hard.
Comment: #40
Posted by: outoutout
Tue Dec 6, 2011 6:12 PM
Re: Lise Brouillette

OMG you have already prepared labels for all sorts of people. How do you NOT see how bigotted you are? Mind boggling!
Comment: #41
Posted by: Carly O
Tue Dec 6, 2011 8:35 PM
Re: Lise Brouillette

Except, Lise you are, again, wrong. Whether you meant to be unnecessarily crude or not, and I don't think even you mean to be "unnecessarily crude", your comments are bigotted beyond belief. If you are comfortable categorizing anyone, male or female, as a drama queen, that is on you and I daresay, you might be the original advice column "Drama queen". Just because an expression is familiar does not mean it is not insulting. Just because you cannot read all the way through the question does not mean you get to sling all those expressions around. I have to admit that I do not know many gay men lately, although I did growing up in NYC, but I am pretty sure none of them would like being called a "Bitch queen" because I believe, unlike you, that gay men, and women for that matter, would like to see themselves as regular people. You are really repulsive.

Comment: #42
Posted by: Carly O
Tue Dec 6, 2011 8:51 PM
@outoutout, very well said -- and I hope nothing I said suggested that I *agreed* with the biphobia I've seen, just that I was reporting on my understanding of it from various discussions. Thanks for adding your voice to the discussion.
Comment: #43
Posted by: Mike H
Wed Dec 7, 2011 8:51 AM

I am NOT gay, and so my percecption is as a straight woman. And in the straight woman community, any guy who says he's "bi" is usually gay.

I won't date a bi-curious man for many reasons. Mainly, I don't think I could handle it. Yes, that's not exactly "opne minded", but here's the deal. I date who I want to date. Some people prefer blondes, some people prefer brunettes, some people like redheads... I prefer my men straight. it is what it IS.

If I was a gay person, I think it would probably be the same, and in my interaction with the gay community, that's how it also perceived for many people. does that mean people don't sometimes walk the line? Well, no. But I think when you DO walk the line, you have to understand that most people are firmly on one side or the other and will have a natural distrust of anyone who seems to want to have the best of both worlds.

I think also it has a lot to do with age. My daughter is 19, and she has many friends who are "bi-curious". I can't keep up with them, which side they are on. But I think in many ways they are EXPERIMENTING much like I did as a straight woman, they are trying to find what works for THEM. And THANK GOD they now can do so without marrying people they don't love, have babies out of societal pressure, and wreck many lives in the bargain.


Comment: #44
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 11:29 AM
@ nanchan

"I am NOT gay, and so my percecption is as a straight woman..."

Then you don't get it and you never will. End of story. Sorry, but that's the facts.
Comment: #45
Posted by: Chris
Wed Dec 7, 2011 3:16 PM
Chris: so that means my opinion is null and void?

Then YOUR opinions on men/women relationships, parent/child relationships, women's issues, are all invalid.

That seems pretty bigoted to me. But if you have to be nasty about something... well, I hope that makes you feel better.
Thanks for reading the post though!
Comment: #46
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 4:04 PM
why all these labels? it sounds like someone here has a problem.
Comment: #47
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:04 PM
Re: Carly O

Yeah, by your own admission, you do not know 'many' gay men, so what are you talking about here? Not something you know.

Look. I realise that some people might jump sky high because the term "bitch queen" has the word "bitch" in it, but it's been around for a very long time, I didn't make it up myself and there is no substitute. Much as I would love to be more PC, I can't help you here.

The term is not a comment on man being gay, it is a comment on a specific gay man's behaviour.

If you had met as many members of the artistic community (as in, classical singers, ballet dancers, stage directors, hair dressers, make-up artists etc) and fashion industry upper echelons (as in, models, designers and boutique owners) as I had, you'd know exactly what kind of man 'bitch queen' describes.

You WILL notice, I do hope, that even though this thread is getting old, the gay members of your little community here didn't jump down my throat or call me bigoted. That should tell you something.

Comment: #48
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:04 PM
Erratum -
"Your little community" should read "our little community".

Comment: #49
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Wed Dec 7, 2011 7:29 PM
Lise: just because two people who you know are gay don't disagree with your post, doesn't mean that it wasn't offensive to other people who are gay.

Many people read these comments and don't post. some of them may be gay. Just because your friends chris and mike, who are in your words in "your little community", don't openly disagree with you (and I would say Mike's post could be argued to be against your language), doesn't mean that others don't.

Yes, you do come across as bigoted. And to excuse it suddenly on a language barrier, is just so insulting to people who have a true issue with English as a second language that it's beyond ridiculous. If you truthfully had a language barrier, you wouldn't even know the term" bitch queen". Just sayin'.
Comment: #50
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 8:06 PM
OH, and since you are a straight woman, Lise, by your own friend chris's post above, you can't possibly understand the situation so your posts are doubly insulting.

Comment: #51
Posted by: nanchan
Wed Dec 7, 2011 8:56 PM
Let's be clear: I'm neutral on Lise's use of the term "bitch queen", and not particularly offended. It *is* indeed the type of thing that is *very commonly* thrown around among gay men AND often by those who regularly hang out with them -- not as an insult or to be offensive, but in a joking, somewhat sarcastic, and generally good-natured way.

I'm personally not a huge fan of the general practice, as I say above, but I'm not going to single Lise out for something than *tens of thousands* in my own community do regularly.

If anyone here thinks that it is horribly offensive to use such language about gay men, then gay men are the worst offenders of using such language about gay men -- and I don't think the excuse "we can say it about each other, but straight people can't" is a valid excuse. Such justification, in my opinion, only confuses the issue.

I knew exactly how Lise was using the term, in fact, I could almost hear the tone of voice if it were spoken -- I'm positive it was not used in a bigoted way.

That doesn't mean I'm excited about the use of the term, just that I know it's not coming from a place of prejudice.
Comment: #52
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 4:08 AM
Re: Mike H

That was a ridiculous post. So, because members of your community use the term, then it's ok?

Is it ok for people to use other slurs?

Personally, I think peole who have to result to using slurs don't have 1) imagination and 2) language skills.

Comment: #53
Posted by: nanchan
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:05 AM
Re: Mike H

That was a ridiculous post. So, because members of your community use the term, then it's ok?

Is it ok for people to use other slurs?

Personally, I think peole who have to result to using slurs don't have 1) imagination and 2) language skills.

Comment: #54
Posted by: nanchan
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:05 AM
Re: nanchan

When they're offended enough, they do post. There are more gay people here besides Mike H and Chris. And Chris is not particularly my friend... we've had, shall we say, strong disagreements in the past, some of it quite recent. I can trust that if I really was being bigoted, he wouldn't be one to spare me.

I wasn't talking about a language barrier, which I really don't think I have, I was talking about semantics. And frankly, nanchan, I think the people who are the ones targetted have the right to decide all by their poor selves how offended they should be, without you demanding they do it your way.

If I'm "coming across" as whatever to you, it's because nothing that comes from me can possibly be right in your eyes, just the fact that I exist at all is enough to set you off.

Comment: #55
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:59 AM
@nanchan, for someone who said she was going to stop this, you're doing a poor job of that. Also, you continue to selectively read and re-interpret what I say in order to keep hammering at Lise.

I specifically said that I'm not a huge fan of the terms as used by anyone, but I'm not going to attack Lise for it when it's so *commonly* used among gay men AND the people who hang out with gay men. That would be unfair; but that doesn't seem to matter to you because you aren't interesting in being fair, you're interested in bashing Lise whenever you spot an opportunity.

You also seem to have missed entirely my description of how those terms are used within our community and our friends and allies. "Bitch queen" isn't even a slur. It's not used as a slur in our community, or by people who hang around our community. I wouldn't say it's always flattering, either, although some of us do take on the term as a badge of honor.

Frankly, although I wouldn't normally agree with Chris because of the way he put it, let's just say that right now it seems VERY odd to me that you think that you, as a non-gay person, have MORE of a right to decide what is offensive to gay people than the ACTUAL gay people on this board. And it's beyond the pale that my DIRECT EXPERIENCE of this word and its use is somehow "ridiculous" to you, even though you don't know what you're talking about and that becomes more and more obvious the deeper you dig yourself into this hole you're in.

It seems to me that your inability to think straight (pun intended) where Lise is concerned has led you to dig in your heels on this issue simply because you find it a convenient way to attack her -- regardless of what anyone is actually saying in their comments.

Your original instinct to drop the matter was probably the better idea. You're not doing yourself or your reputation any favors by continuing down this particular path.
Comment: #56
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 7:18 AM
Oh please. You misread and misparaphrased my posts so much that I HAVE to respond.

first of all, I'm not saying that I have any more right to say how a gay person would react. How CAN I? I am not gay! But my point is, that it COULD be offensive to some people, gay people included. And it certainly offended many other people on this thread, and they have value too, Mike.

You and Chris do NOT represent the entire GAY community any more thanI represent the whole straight community.

That point of your last post was so elitist and self important it's again, ridiculous.

Second of all, I have every right to post here. Don't tell me I can't. I'm not calling people names, harrassing them (as you are me by refusing to validate my right to voicce my opinions), and I'm not using profanity (as Lise did).

Third of all, how I feel about Lise is not important. Her POST is what I object to. YOU are the one who is letting your friendship with Lise cloud your judgement. YOU are the one who refuses to think.... correctly. You refuse to admit that what she said was inappropriate.

If ANYBODY ELSE had used that language, I'll bet both you and chris would have been the first to be offended.
Comment: #57
Posted by: nanchan
Thu Dec 8, 2011 9:43 AM
LW1 -- please disregard the BTL on this one. Margo answered you perfectly. There are any number of reasons your friend didn't immediately tell you what was going on, and NONE of them has to do with "betraying" you. This is about your friend, not you. Keep your focus on continuing to be a good friend.

BTL -- the great irony here is that the BTL has sort of done the exact same thing that the LW did -- took something that wasn't about us and somehow turned it into being all about us.

LW2 -- seriously, you make poker sound like it was your soulmate. Dude, it's called beginner's luck, and like all sorts of luck, it eventually changes. If you wrote the letter the way you did in an effort to be somewhat entertaining, then here's a newsflash: don't quit your day job, because your future isn't in poker OR comedic writing. If you wrote the letter the way you did because you really and truly feel all this angst about losing the love of your life -- poker -- you have a much bigger problem and had better skip poker from here on out.
Comment: #58
Posted by: Lisa
Thu Dec 8, 2011 11:28 AM
@nanchan, you continue to be blinded by your obsessive rivalry with Lise, and you again put words in my mouth that were never there. *I* never once said you couldn't or shouldn't post. You're struggling with basic reading comprehension here OR you are DELIBERATELY MAKING THINGS UP to try to cover up the indefensibility of your stated position.

*You* said you were stopping, and then didn't, and I wasn't even responding to you directly when you jumped back into post claiming I was misrepresenting you. So I just pointed out you didn't keep your word, that's all, and that you may have been better served by your original instinct. That's hardly claiming that you don't have a right to post here, and anyone can see that. Your distortions grow wilder with each post.

I also never once claimed to represent the entire gay community, but I'll for sure defend that I have a far greater insight into the community than you do -- a point you continue to gloss over because it doesn't help your cause.

And, yes, when you try to dismiss what I say OVER your interpretation of what I said, YOU are the one being elitist and insulting. You trot out the insults quite freely and haven't yet apologized for a single one of them.

In fact, when the insults you make are pointed out, you get defensive and dig your heels in deeper. Sounds suspiciously like the exact way you describe the behavior of a certain someone you're obsessed with.

Your defense doesn't make sense -- anything COULD be offensive to ANYONE, if you want to get right down to it. And I never said other opinions had no value, I very specifically said this was my view. Again, basic reading comprehension, nanchan. You really aren't doing yourself any favors with this tirade. People can read my actual words earlier on this very page and see how badly you are twisting my words to suit your own agenda.

And, if you'd bother to read my actual words, I've already said that I've heard those words used quite a lot in my time. So, "anybody else" HAS used that language around me, and I've not cried out how offended I was. So you'd lose that bet -- which you would have realized had you actually comprehended what I wrote above, instead of flying off the handle and trying to twist my words around to suit your continuing vendetta against Lise.

Finally, you say you aren't calling anyone names, and yet you throw around dismissive verbiage like "ridiculous" and "elitist" and "pathetic" and "sad" without compunction. Those aren't exactly compliments, nanchan.

You expect other people to back down and apologize when you confront them about insulting words, but don't do the same actions yourself in nearly the exact same circumstances. I guess it's acceptable when you do it, but not when anyone else does. The evidence of your hypocrisy is clearly written throughout this entire thread: you desire to hold Lise to standards you yourself have failed to meet.
Comment: #59
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 11:41 AM
Oh Mike, give it a REST! Lisa has a great point, it's not about BTL, it's about the LW.

Hope you have a sweet and wonderful afternoon!
Comment: #60
Posted by: nanchan
Thu Dec 8, 2011 12:15 PM
Oh, nanchan, I'm allowed to post just as much as you are. It's a little convenient on your part, to duck responsibility for your own words and actions by telling me to "give it a rest". That is insufficient after your tirades, insults, and distortions. And it's still not an apology, either.

So let's be clear: I don't like it when you distort and twist my words to suit your own agenda, and I will respond every time you do so. I have a right to make sure any lies about me or my contributions are refuted. If you don't like the results, don't twist my words again.

I don't like it when you try to make me a pawn in your little game with Lise, and I will respond every time you do so. If you don't like the results, you can stop dragging me into this.

I also don't care for people who don't practice what they preach, for people who live their lives by "do what I say, not what I do", for people who demand that others live up to standards they themselves refuse to live by. I have just as much a right to post as you do, and as long as you "do one thing but try to make others do another", I will respond. And if you don't like the results, then simply stop trying to moderate others when you don't moderate yourself.

Or, to put it in another way, "Oh, nanchan, give it a REST!"

My hope for you this afternoon is that you take a bit of a break and actually self-reflect for a bit. It's perhaps the most valuable suggestion I could give to you, given all of the above.
Comment: #61
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 1:48 PM
@Lisa, agreed -- however, I won't let my words be twisted without defending them, either. It gives the wrong impression that I'm agreeing with the falsehood, and that just leads to trouble. It's unfortunate, but it's reality.

Still, it's a good reminder, and I appreciate it.
Comment: #62
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 1:51 PM
@ Mike H -- I don't blame you (or anyone, really) for wanting to defend yourself. It's a natural human trait. It is far, far harder to instead sit by and say nothing. I ought to know -- I almost NEVER take the high road and instead immediately want to defend myself!
Comment: #63
Posted by: Lisa
Thu Dec 8, 2011 2:38 PM
oh Mike! never an original idea in your head.

Again. I hope you have a nie afternoon.

Point and MATCH!
Comment: #64
Posted by: nanchan
Thu Dec 8, 2011 3:17 PM
@nanchan, another insult post from the woman who decries other posters for being insulting? At least you're consistent in your hypocrisy.

But I have had a nice afternoon -- and I would like to thank you for making it crystal clear to the rest of the board that you simply are not credible on this issue any more, that you very obviously have one set of rules for others and another for yourself.
Comment: #65
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:20 PM
@Lisa, it's a process for us all, learning what to let go of and what to confront, and we all make mistakes. But thanks.
Comment: #66
Posted by: Mike H
Thu Dec 8, 2011 5:22 PM
Good flamin' grief. Interesting that I'm not in the least interested in "rivalling' with anyone... everyone has a right to post as far as I'm concerned.

Just goes go prove my own saying that it takes two to make peace, but only one to make a war.

Comment: #67
Posted by: Lise Brouillette
Thu Dec 8, 2011 6:58 PM
I wonder about the previous relationship status of LW1's friend. If he was in a long term relationship with a man or was a serial monogamist always with men, therefore had no reason to question his attractions because he hasn't been looking for a while and gravitated to what he knew when/if he was single, is it possible he didn't realize he was bi until a friendship with a woman caught fire? Is it terribly naive of me to think that's possible? (That wasn't rhetorical, by the way, I imagine it's pretty unusual and wonder if it's unusual to the point of implausable.)
Comment: #68
Posted by: Nichole
Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:29 PM
Is it possible that, because of a long term relationship or serial monogamy with men, it never occured to LW1's friend that he had opposite sex attractions until a friendship caught fire? Is it terribly naive of me to wonder that? (Not rhetorical by the way, I imagine it would be pretty unusual to be surprised by something like that, I just don't know if it would be unusual to the point of implausible.)
Comment: #69
Posted by: Nichole
Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:32 PM
Sorry about the double post, I had, you already know.
Comment: #70
Posted by: Nichole
Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:33 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Other similar columns
Susan Deitz
Single File
by Susan Deitz
Ann Landers
Classic Ann Landers
by Ann Landers
Jan Denise
Margo Howard
Mar. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
23 24 25 26 27 28 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
About the author About the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month