DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: So, I lived very happily being single for some time – and I also had my quota of serious relationships in the past. But after some time being single, I met this girl in my home country that I really feel comfortable with. Then, fate happened: I moved to another country on another continent. Although I was still feeling comfortable by myself, after some time dating at a distance and a few very expensive plane tickets, we decided that it could be cool to live together here: at least as a test… we never lived with a couple before so it was a new experience for both of us. It was really a pain to bring her here, because of COVID  bureaucracy, the fact that she came with her cat (and I had mine)… but we finally made it.

So, it’s already been a year since she arrived, and I’m still comfortable with her. The thing is, I’m really missing the fact of being single: particularly in the fact of dating other random women.

Don’t get me wrong, I feel really sexually satisfied and happy with her right now, but I do miss the fact of getting out there, trying to seduce other bodies, other voices, other personalities; even if that sometimes derived in a not-so-satisfying sexual encounter, the fun was in all the process.

We had a very short conversation about “opening the relationship” but she was 100% against it, so clearly “going rogue” would definitely hurt her a lot. But I really feel very tempted…

Any suggestions here?

Cheers,

Abroad Guy With Single Thoughts

DEAR ABROAD GUY WITH SINGLE THOUGHTS: Right off the bat, AGWST: what you’re feeling is normal and damn near everyone experiences it to one degree or another. One of the tropes about relationships and dating that is my continual pet peeve is the idea that monogamy is simple, easy and everyone can do it. It isn’t, it definitely isn’t easy and no, not everyone can. That’s not a moral failing; that’s just human biology. We are a novelty-seeking species, and one of the most powerful forms of novelty is sexual novelty. Even folks who are ostensibly monogamous still indulge in sexual novelty; folks who watch porn don’t just watch one movie or one particular porn star, after all.

The fact that you’re attracted to other women doesn’t mean that there’s anything wrong in your relationship. The fact that you kind of miss going out and hooking up with new people is natural; it’s that thrill of the new. This doesn’t mean you’re a bad person or that your relationship is failing. It just means that you’re a primate with a sex drive, same as everyone  else. While some folks may feel the urge at different levels and some may have an easier time pushing it down, it’s something that hits pretty much everyone. Monogamy just means that you’ve chosen to not sleep with other people; it doesn’t say a damn thing about not wanting to.

However, at the same time: just because things are natural doesn’t mean they can’t f--k up a perfectly good relationship.

Here’s the thing: every relationship comes with a price of entry. It can sound cold when you look at it dispassionately, but every relationship is subject to a cost/benefit analysis.  No relationship, no matter the relationship style, the person, the country or any other condition you care to name, occurs without compromise. If you are in a relationship with someone, you are giving up something. Many times, what you’re giving up is sex or romantic relationships with other people. Other times, it may be a particular type of sex. You may be letting go of dreams of having kids, traveling to exotic locales, working a particular job because now you need to support a family… there is always a compromise being made. The key is that while you may be giving up something that you want, what you get in exchange is so awesome and makes you so happy that you can accept not getting the rest.

Case in point: you like the thrill of meeting someone new, the process of getting to know each other, the build up of attraction and tension to the moment where you and they fall into bed together. That’s both very common and very normal, and for a lot of folks, that’s something that they can’t live without.

However, that’s something you can’t have in the relationship you have with your girlfriend. While some folks are cool with non-monogamy — if they aren’t non-monogamous themselves — others aren’t. Your girlfriend has made it clear that she’s one of the folks who isn’t. Being in a relationship with her means that the price of entry is that you are giving up the thrill of the new. Cheating on her — not “going rogue” or some other euphemism, cheating — will likely destroy her trust in you and your relationship in short order. And while I know my view of infidelity is nuanced, what you’re describing as “very tempting” is a deliberate betrayal of that trust. That’s not “I had a couple too many drinks and failed my Wisdom save”, that would be choosing to do something that you know would hurt her.

So, you’re asking for suggestions. If I’m going to be honest, AGWST, my suggestion would be that you shouldn’t have committed to a monogamous relationship when you started dating her. If that thrill of the new is something that you know you need, then agreeing to a monogamous commitment isn’t a great idea. That’s not something that you “get out of your system” or “goes away in time”; it’s part of who you are and what you need in a relationship. Trying to force yourself to not feel something only ends up making it stronger.

I would also say that moving straight from long-distance to living together wasn’t a great choice. The dynamics of dating when you live in different cities or countries is different than when you live in the same place. Leaping from an LDR straight to living together means having to adjust to a lot of differences very, very quickly, and that can put a pretty significant strain on the relationship. When that leap involves moving to an entirely different country adds a lot of pressure on the relationship; they’re in a place with very little social support or connections besides you. That can make it very hard to deal with the usual stresses that come up in every relationship. Now the stakes involved in resolving your issues are much, much higher than they might be otherwise.

That can put a serious strain on relationships, especially if you’re already feeling like you’re missing being single. It’s harder to have those awkward, necessary conversations when you know that breaking up has vastly different stakes for them.

But all of that would require having access to a Flux Capacitor or a TARDIS and since none of us have those things, the only way we can move is forward.

So under the current situation, you have a choice. You can either decide that what you don’t get — dating and sleeping with other people — is a compromise you can make because what you get in exchange is so worth it. Or you can decide that this isn’t a price you’re willing to pay for your relationship.

It’s certainly possible that she’ll change her mind about opening up the relationship, and there’s nothing saying that you can’t circle back to that discussion down the line. Not every relationship starts off open, and some couples come to ethical non-monogamy after having been monogamous for a while. Some come to it even after having rejected it out of hand previously. However, this usually takes a lot of time while you build up the level of trust, security and communication needed for her to feel ready to consider the possibility.

At the same time, though, she may never get to that point no matter what. Going further into this relationship on the assumption that you will change her mind later is a bad idea. If this is something you knew about yourself from the jump, then you would have a better time saying “I am willing to be monogamous with you for now, but I’ll want to reopen this discussion later,” at the beginning. So if you’re going to go forward with your relationship with her, then you have to do so recognizing that an ethically non-monogamous relationship may never be on the table.

If you do decide to stay with your girlfriend, then I would suggest making a point of keeping the thrills in your sex life a priority. While you can’t keep the initial novelty of a new partner alive forever, you can keep the excitement and adventures together alive. Beyond the biological component, part of why sex and passion fade in relationships is because people fall into ruts. They quit doing so many of the crazy things they did at the start of a relationship — including all the wild sexual encounters — because they’re starting to settle in. When you’re having sex the same ways, at the same times… well, it gets a little repetitive. It gets dull. Part of making a relationship work in the long term means continuing to shake things up, try new things and to avoid falling into patterns. So, in your case, part of what might make monogamy more acceptable as a price of entry would be to put the effort in to keep the sexual novelty and adventure going. Whether it’s exploring kinks together, creating artificial barriers you have to overcome together or stepping up your Gomez Addams game, keeping the spark alive and vital will be an important part of making this relationship work.

And if you still need a little strange on occasion? Get yourself a couple Tengas or Fleshlights, subscribe to some Fansly or OnlyFans profiles and jerk one out.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: I’m a 42 year old woman who has had one long term relationship in my life, that lasted about 10 years but ended over 10 years ago. Other than that it has been a series of dates here and there, but generally the guys just ghost or tell me that they aren’t feeling a spark. And this has been the case my entire life. I didn’t date in High School because nobody would ask me out even though, in the years since, a lot of my former friends from that time told me they had crushes on me, but they were intimidated. My one boyfriend broke up with me because he felt like I didn’t really need him, and that I would be better off without him. (I guess he was sort of right, after the relationship ended I quit the job I hated, but kept because it worked with his schedule, and went to law school and became an attorney).

I want very much to be in a long term monogamous relationship, hopefully marriage. I am on dating apps. I try to always look cute even if I am not conventionally attractive anymore (but I was very hot as a teenager and I still couldn’t get dates, so it can’t just be my looks). I am in therapy to work on the grieving process I feel about not being married by now (and the fact I probably won’t be able to have biological children) and he has had me ask my friends and family about why they think I’m having issues in this area. The thing that keeps coming up is that I have a big personality, have carved out this full life for myself, and that I am always doing lots of stuff to stay busy, and that guys are scared by that because they don’t see where they would fit in my life.

Is that something guys need? It doesn’t make sense to me because if I meet a guy who seems to have a “girlfriend shaped hole” in their life it freaks me out. I don’t want someone to be auditioning me for a part they already have written to see if I fit, I want someone to get to know me and build something with me. Is that unusual? Do guys need to feel needed, and if so how can I build that life so that I need someone who may, or may not, ever exist?

Running Solo Build

DEAR RUNNING SOLO BUILD: Congratulations RSB, you asked a question without realizing that this was an ‘insert quarter, receive essay’ topic for me.

So there’re two things going on, RSB and they all come down to one thing: society has really f--ked men up.

The first is the classic issue of The Intimidating Woman — someone who is just too “intimidating” for guys to ever feel comfortable getting into a relationship with. This is an issue a lot of women face, especially growing up; they’re ambitious, they’re focused and driven, they’ve got passions, goals and a future… but no dates. Meanwhile, guys are out there saying that they want someone who’s focused, ambitious and driven… but they’re not dating the women who embody those very qualities. And if you were to ask them why, they’d tell you: those women are a little too intimidating for them. Instead, they end up dating women who seem to be the opposite of what they say they want — women who’re less driven, less ambitious and often less successful in areas that those men feel are more “their” province, particularly in terms of careers or financial status.

The second issue actually ties into the first: guys who feel like they need to be needed by their partners in order to have a relationship. If a woman has her life together… well, then why would she possibly need him? So the woman who may not Have It All, but at least Has Quite A Lot — women who’re successful, who have big or forceful personalities or who live a fulfilling life often find that men… just don’t feel comfortable approaching or dating her.

So I want to be clear here: this isn’t a you problem. This is a systematic issue with society as a whole and the way that men have been damaged by the way we’ve been socialized. This has little to do with your accomplishments and everything to do with the whammy that toxic, confining and restrictive ideas of masculinity have put on men’s heads.

One of the issues I’ve brought up a lot around here is how emotionally and socially isolated men tend to be. Men have fairly few close emotionally intimate relationships — far fewer than women do, and very few with other men. This is in no small part because we’ve been socialized to see emotional intimacy as being the same as, or a precursor to, sexual intimacy. This didn’t used to be the case. Throughout history, men had very close, emotionally intimate and significant relationships with other men. If you were to look at old photos of men and their friends, you’d be shocked by the amount of closeness and physical contact between them. You’d be forgiven, in this day and age, for thinking that these were lovers, not good friends. But the truth is that, until recently, men were freer to have that level of casual physical and emotional intimacy with other guys. We were more comfortable with casual touch and physical affection with one another and treating our friendships as significant and meaningful.

And that all changed as social narratives surrounding masculinity started to curdle. Homophobia, the fear of being perceived as “gay” and idea of masculinity as social dominance came to the forefront and started to change male friendships and leaving men more isolated and alone. And to be clear: this is learned behavior. You can see this today in the friendships that boys have in childhood; they’re much freer to express themselves, more affectionate and more connected to their friends. This starts changing by the time we turn 10; social narratives about what is or isn’t acceptable “guy behavior” start getting enforced and boys start taking those lessons onboard. By the time they’re 13, those friendships have altered drastically, if they survived the transition at all. Boys become more closed off, less warm and expressive and far more concerned with not being seen as weird, weak or “faggy”, and those lessons follow us and are reinforced for the entirety of our lives.

(Yes, even in 2021, we have boys growing up afraid of being seen as queer and we still have queerness weaponized as an insult.)

Now, the reason why I bring all of this up is because of the knock-on effects that this changes brings.

One of the biggest is the fear of weakness or being perceived as weak or less dominant. Because aggression and dominance are emphasized as masculine virtues, not being dominant or in charge is seen as a failure as man. This weakness means you’re going to be forced down the social ladder by other men; after all, dominating others is one of the fastest and easiest ways for men to establish their manly bonafides. And so we equate not being dominant or in charge as a form of failure to be a “Real Man”. That, in turn, means that we’re weak, vulnerable even… and thus more likely to be dominated by others.

This leads to one of the reasons why you run into guys who say one thing — “I want to date a driven, ambitious, successful woman” — and do another. It’s not that they don’t want to date someone who’s driven and ambitious, it’s that silent, unspoken addendum: “…who’s not as driven or ambitious or successful as I am.” It’s one thing to date somebody who has her s--t together and is going places. It’s another entirely to date someone who might outclass or out earn you. And as silly as that may seem in the modern age, the fact of the matter is that a lot of men who earn less than their spouses have higher levels of anxiety, insomnia, depression and erectile dysfunction. Not being the primary breadwinner is literally emasculating to them.

Another effect of this change that men face is the emotional isolation it brings. Because emotional intimacy is seen as either a prelude to or synonymous with sexual intimacy, emotional intimacy is thus forbidden except with people you might conceivably f--k. So — leaving aside how this conflation of friendship and sexual intimacy perpetuates the whole Friend Zone myth — part of what happens is that men’s friendships with other men are incredibly limited in scope and connection. Meanwhile, their only acceptable outlet for emotional intimacy and vulnerability is with women.

Now, here’s where the “need to be needed” part comes in: that emotional isolation also cuts us off from forms of validation and self-expression. Consider the typical friendship between women. It’s said that male friendships are side-by-side while female friendships are face-to-face. What this means is that male friendships tend to be activity-based; our friendships are focused around doing things together, where any sort of bonding is secondary to the activity. Female friendships, on the other hand, tend to be about bonding, intimacy, validation and sharing; women get together with their friends to see their friends. And a significant part of those friendships involve validation, vulnerability and support. This is something women in general and young girls in particular develop early on, and it creates a very different dynamic between how women are socialized to see themselves and how men are.

If you were to look at girls’ Instagrams and other social media, you would see how often their friends hype them up; they have their squad telling them how great they look, how cool they are, and so on. Boys, especially straight boys, don’t have that sort of social support from their friends. And that takes its toll in a lot of ways. And one of the most profound — and relevant to your question — is that it leaves men thinking that they’re not desired or desirable. And this is a problem on many levels; after all, not only do men and boys crave intimacy and validation as well as emotional connection, but one of the toxic ideals about manhood is that a man’s status is, in part, measured by how much sex he has.

But if men aren’t desirable… then what are we supposed to do to raise our status? Well, it comes down to the issue you’re facing: because men don’t feel wanted, they feel like they need to be needed instead. If they’re needed, then at least there is a value-for-value proposition; they provide value in the form of “being a provider”, particularly financially, and are rewarded with sex… which then raises their value and status.

However, there’re a number of drawbacks to this. Well, drawbacks beyond “wow, that’s a really toxic and s--tty thing to believe about yourself,” anyway.

To start with, the idea that our value is predicated in part on our ability to provide creates a sort of arms race, where those who can provide more are thus more valuable. So we instill the belief that our value — and commiserate ability to acquire “valuable” women — is in part predicated on our financial and material success. So someone who has more — more money, more success, more stuff — is thus a more desirable partner. This creates a cult-of-success mentality where you need to have a consistent and rising amount of financial success in order to be sufficient to date and to ward off your supposed competition.

It also creates an antagonistic relationship between men and… well, literally everyone else. Other men are seen as our competition and believed to be likely to pounce if there’s even a hint of weakness. Meanwhile, if a man’s value is in what he can provide, then his value is inherently unstable, especially in the current economy where job security is the career equivalent of The Loch Ness Monster. Worse, under this system of belief, there’s (theoretically) no reason why women shouldn’t always be on the lookout for a higher-value man. If women, in this scenario, are attracted to a man’s ability to provide, then they’re motivated to trade up whenever possible. And worse, because women “control” men’s ability to raise their value by controlling the access to sex, it creates an antagonistic relationship between men and women. Men are incentivized to get sex at any cost, while women are incentivized to withhold sex until they get the highest value they possibly can… creating a situation where someone is going to lose.

And just to make matters worse, this idea of “man-as-provider” was predicated on a time when women simply didn’t have the same financial opportunities or security that men did. Most women had to look to men, not for love or connection or companionship but for survival, because the alternative was starvation or worse. But in this day and age, as society continues to narrow the economic gap between men and women, and women have unprecedented financial security and freedom, women aren’t reliant on men for survival any more. The economic “need” is functionally rendered moot. Worse still, as women become more empowered to handle their own affairs, capable of doing “men’s work” in their lives and otherwise being able to survive and thrive just fine on their own… the areas where men are “needed” grows smaller and smaller.

So if you’re a guy who doesn’t believe that he has worth outside of what he can do for someone else on a material level… well, you find yourself to be a rapidly depreciating asset. This gets made worse by things, like, say, not wanting a woman who’s “needy”  them because they want to be able to live their life as though they were still single. Managing someone’s emotional needs is difficult when you barely have a grasp on your own emotions and needs, so they want a woman who doesn’t “need” them”.

(A lot of the men who don’t want “needy” or “clingy” women also are hoping to be able to keep f--king around until they find one they’d rather have, but that’s a different issue entirely.)

This creates a situation where men get stuck; they supposedly want a particular type of woman, but as with many areas in life, there’s the vast difference between “wanting something” and “dealing with the reality of having it,” that is — as so many things in this modern age are — best expressed in meme format.

Man: “Man, the last thing I want is some clingy girl. I want to date a woman who doesn’t need me.”

Woman: “OK…”

goes off and lives her life.

Man: “Wait, not like that…”

So you end up with these competing desires. There’s the desire to be wanted, which they think they aren’t, and instead gets sublimated to the desire to be needed. However, they want to be needed in a very specific way. At the same time, they want a woman who matches certain criteria, but can’t be honest enough with themselves to admit that either they don’t actually want that, or they want it in a way that leaves them feeling superior and in control. So either they can be ‘needed’ or they can be needed. But as more and more women don’t need men — not in the limited way those men tend to think — and the delineations between “men’s stuff” and “women’s stuff” gets erased, men find themselves in increasingly untenable positions.

And thus we come back to your dilemma, RSB: you want to date, but you also live life out loud and don’t “need” a man. Thus you end up with guys who find you “intimidating”. So what do you do about it?

Well… ultimately you have two options. The first is that you live your life and look for a guy who can actually meet you where you are. This may be someone who’s a little softer and less caught up in traditional, restrictive forms of masculinity, or it could be someone who’s confident enough in himself that he doesn’t need to be “needed” by someone to feel desirable or worthy of love. However, this means accepting being single for a while, likely longer than you might prefer. Sometimes the issue with waiting for guys to catch up to you means that you’re going to be waiting for quite some time. While there’re more and more men who are becoming comfortable with shucking the restrictions of coercive forms of masculinity, socialization is a motherf--ker and it can be difficult to uproot all of it. So you may well meet dudes who seem like they’re able to meet you at your level — or who are cool with being the support class to your front line character — but who end up having issues with it, a la your last boyfriend.

The other option is you can choose to change, to make adjustments so that some guy would feel like there’s “room” for him in your life. But, to be blunt: a lot of times, this means making yourself smaller for the comfort of others… sanding off bits of you so that other people aren’t as scared or feel less intimidated by you. The trade off for having a relationship means that you had to reduce and limit yourself so other people wouldn’t be as afraid or intimidated by you… and that can chafe. A lot. And it sounds to me that, despite not having romance in your life, you have a pretty good and satisfying life.

You can also try to carve room in your life for someone to fit. But that can be difficult, especially when you love your life, and when you want a guy who can meet you at your level and on your terms. As I’m telling guys all the time: you want someone who complements your life, not completes it, who adds something to it rather than fills a hole. Because, honestly: that hole isn’t there because someone was missing. The hole is there because there’s some part of you that’s missing.

Now in my opinion, I think you’re making a lot of the right moves. Talking to a therapist to process your entirely reasonable feelings of loss and regret is a good start. So too is living a full life. One of the unfortunate truths of this world is that love and companionship don’t always happen on our preferred schedule, and sometimes the love of your life needs to be the love of your life. Having a life full of friends, family and meaning is important. And while yes, love is important too… sometimes giving up that life for love means finding a love that doesn’t fit, or a love that doesn’t match who you are.

Does that make the loneliness any less or the sense of loss for what children you may have had any easier? Not always. But there are ways of dealing with both. What there isn’t, however, is a way of dealing with the special kind of loneliness that comes from being with someone who isn’t right for you. Being lonely because you’re with the wrong person is like having a void that can never be fully filled or closed; you can ignore it or distract yourself from it, but the feeling is always there just at the edge of your perception.

I’m not gonna lie: looking for someone who can actually match you or complement your life can be frustrating. You may be looking for a while. But as the saying goes: nobody ever said that it would be easy… just that in the end, it will be worth it.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: I love your work! I’m a female and your work gives me hope in so many ways. You remind me that men, woman and all humans identifying inside of or outside of the binary system all have the same issues, as well as desires, dreams, and goals. But we are conditioned differently to become a social construction of gender instead of just human.

Anyway, I wanted to reach out to you mostly to vent, but also maybe you can help. My family is very conservative and I considered posting a little rant of my FB page, but realized that would probably cause the men in my family to call me a crazy female or ask if I’m ‘riding the broom’ or whatever.

So I asked myself who would be interested in explaining to men why this situation is wrong and where would men actually listen to the rationale? Lightbulb! Dr. NerdLove and his people! Yay!

Ok so here’s the story: I joined Codependents Anonymous about 8 months ago. I have a history of various kind of abuse from both men and women and I finally had a therapist call out my issues as codependent and push me into meetings. Through the program I am realizing how much abuse I haven’t even seen, because I didn’t even know it was abuse.

I decided to join a mixed group (open to all genders) which made me very uneasy at first, because most of my abuse has been from men. As it tuned out the group has been really cathartic. It turns out men can be codependent too! (Which I knew from reading your blog, but hit me differently in Coda) I felt safe there for the first 6 months. But now there’s a man in the group (who’s actually one of the original founders of the meeting I attend) and he’s making me feel really uncomfortable.

A few months ago he was talking to me after the meeting and he asked if I was married and I said no. So he told me, “you should just get married.” And I was shocked. I asked, “Where is that even coming from?” He said, “well if you were married you’d deal with your husbands problems and you’d have your own family and you wouldn’t have time to worry about other people anymore.” And I was shocked again, because 1. He assumes I’m going to marry a man 2. Shifting coda issue from friends to family isn’t actually solving the whole codependency issue. It’s literally just transferring it to other relationships. So I just sat there with my mouth hanging open. The other leader of the group started laughing and I gave him a sharp look, so he stopped laughing and told the guy to knock it off because he was not being helpful.

Fast forward to today, the same guy who told me that I should “just get married and it would solve all my problems” said some more toxically masculine nonsense.

So I shared tonight that I am in a DBT ( Dialectical Behavior Therapy) group and I had learned about core emotions including sadness. There was a list of maybe 8 reasons to feel sad, and when I read them I had 7 of them. Being codependent I was like,” oh wait. what? oh ok so I am sad. Interesting!” Because I have trouble even identifying my emotion, just finding the correct emotion felt like a positive step.

After I read the reasons to be sad I learned it’s ok for me to be sad. I was surprising to me that it’s ok for me to have this emotion that’s not just making other people happy.

I called a friend (because they suggested it as a coping mechanism in DBT ) and I said, “hey I am sad and this _ is why” and she validated that it was ok for me to be sad and that I had a right to be sad! I was so happy/ relieved to find out it was acceptable for me to be sad. It felt great actually — I get to have emotions just like other people! Wooo! It felt great to share the odd win with the group. Haha. Allowing myself to be sad about sad things is not something I’ve been able to do. It felt crazy to let myself be sad, but I’m learning it’s not crazy, it’s human.

Anyway coda has a rule that you can’t comment on other people’s shares during share time, but after people chat and sometimes say, “your share was really helpful” or “I related to that so much, thank you for your share.” Which doesn’t bother me at all. But the same guy who told me that getting married would solve all of my problems chimed in to say, “I don’t want you to be sad” I was thinking uh oh… oh no. Here we go… but I smiled and said, “oh ok, thanks.” So the other (male) lead jumps in and says, “hey man, she just found out it is ok for her to be sad.” The sexist guy says, “well I just don’t want her to be sad. It’s not good to be sad all of the time. If she’s sad she’ll get depression and I don’t want that for her.” So then a female in the group jumps in and says, “hey that’s not what she said…” and defends me in allowing me to feel my own emotions.

The sexist guy then says, “well you have such a pretty face, it’s a shame for you to be sad. You’re too pretty to be sad.” And I nearly lost my mind, but as society has condition me to do I smiled like my life depended on it. He continued, “I just want to give you a Dutch hug and make you feel better.” The other male lead made some kind of joke that I couldn’t hear over of the very colorful stream of profanity’s my brain was coming up with. I was fighting to keep it all contained behind my *pretty* smile. I replied, “yeah you’re right. I’ll just rub some dirt in in.” Everyone laughed and the situation was diffused. But I was furious. I looked happy, but I was fighting not to lose it.

Because a man finds me attractive I only get to be happy or turned on. My being anything outside of these emotion threatens their fragile toxic masculinity. I am a real person, not a doll sent her to beautify your life or make you feel good about yourself. How can one human dictate the emotional range of another and not understand that it is abuse?

I don’t want to cause a problem in the group, but I also can’t allow myself to be treated as less than a person. I am smart and funny and competent — I struggle every day to remind myself I am worthy. When s--t like this happens I feel I’m back to being the helpless girl who has to keep the men around happy so she can be safe.

I just want to feel safe in body. And because I am a woman I don’t get that right. Because I am a young attractive woman I don’t get to feel safe or angry or sad. I must be happy to stay safe. And I can’t stand it anymore.

I couldn’t stand up for myself today or a month ago. But I want to stand up for myself in the future. I realize this guy is a moron and he is probably incapable of understanding why he has offended me.

I actually understand the he meant well. He probably believes he did me a solid. He probably believes he made me feel attractive. He probably believes made me feel like I deserve to be happy. But he didn’t actually accomplish any of that.

I know what he wanted to say was, “you are young and beautiful and you deserve to be happy and find someone to love you. I wish I had the power to bring you joy and peace.” I know that’s what he meant.

But what he said was, “you’re too pretty to be sad.” He took away my value as a human — unless I am happy — I shouldn’t even exist. If I’m not being happy / acting happy I’m just making him insecure and bringing down the mood. I should just be happy. I mean I’m a girl why should I be sad, when there are men like him running the world. It’s a simple job for a young pretty girl

1. Smile

2. get married

3. radiate happiness

I know it’s not about me. He probably just doesn’t know any better. He probably meant well. He will probably never learn. I could spend years trying to gently explain this to the guy and it’s probably that nothing would change. It’s frustrating. I wish I lived in a world where this didn’t keep happening. Can you help me explain to the men (who care to learn) why semantics matters? Why women need to be allowed to be sad, even if they are pretty?

Sincerely,

Survivor and Recovering Codependent Human Female

DEAR SURVIVOR AND RECOVERING CODEPENDENT HUMAN FEMALE: Honestly, SRCHF, I don’t think you need me to explain things differently; you laid it out rather well here!

Other than saying the same thing as you, just as a man (which, sadly, does make some folks listen), I would add this: one of the problems with the way this guy framed and phrased things isn’t just the semantics or underlying sexism. It’s the message he’s sending — likely without realizing it. Much like when men tell women to “smile”, the message he’s sending when he says “you’re too pretty to be sad” is that his desire carries more weight than yours does. Despite what you have shared during your session, he has decided that your feelings are less deserved and less valid.

He doesn’t want that for you? Well, it’s good to want things. Except, the way he’s phrased things is that he has decided that his wishes supersede your lived experience. His desire for you to not be sad — because it apparently displeases his boner — somehow outranks your right to feel the way you feel. Because he has deemed you to be “too pretty”, this means that your continuing to be sad is an affront to his wishes. While he may not realize that’s what he’s saying, the effect is that he’s telling you that he has determined that you aren’t the person best positioned to decide how you should feel. He is. And, as the kids said five minutes ago: that ain’t it, chief.

There’s also the unintentional judgement on your appearance and the other women in your group. Would it be ok for you to be sad if you were less attractive? Are people who are less conventionally attractive less deserving of happiness? Should your physical features mean that you’re only “allowed” to experience certain emotions and that the full range of the human experience are only for people who rank between, what, a 4 and a 7? Is it ok for you to have expressions or emotions other than happiness if it doesn’t make his penis smile?

But really, the most important part, more than anything else, is right here where you hit the nail precisely on the head:

“When s--t like this happens I feel I’m back to being the helpless girl who has to keep the men around happy so she can be safe.

I just want to feel safe in body. And because I am a woman I don’t get that right. Because I am a young attractive woman I don’t get to feel safe or angry or sad. I must be happy to stay safe. And I can’t stand it anymore.”

That is what he — and folks like him — needs to hear. You phrased this perfectly. And you’re becoming stronger and more self-assured every day. You’ve got the tools, you’ve got the words and you’ve got the strength to handle all of this, SRCHF. You’re building yourself up to be precisely the person you needed one month ago, today and tomorrow. You’re becoming your own hero and you should be immensely proud of all the progress you’ve made, because it’s pretty goddamn bad-ass of you.

You’ve got this.

All will be well.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com