Ok, so let's say miss hot thing moves in, shit happens and the boyfriend cheats. Would the LW really want to hang on to him in that case? If he can't keep it in his pants even in the face of temptation then why bother with him? I understand that men look, biology and all that, but actually acting on those impulses is crossing a line. Also, Amy, you're spot on about advising the LW to focus her energies on highlighting the reasons why she ought to be his only gal.

Love you Amy, but I totally agree with The Girlfriend. I'm sure she trusts him, but why allow a situation to form that will provide temptation? I love and trust my own boyfriend, but you wouldn't catch me gathering catalogues for a trip to Horny- Supermodel Island.

Think about it. Everyone thinks the grass is greener on the other side. So what if said grass is a young hottie, who enjoys the attention of a taken man because it never has to come to anything, and because this guy is not dating her, he only sees the green?
She could seem funny, smart, sexy, nice……….. She could also be a mental patient, but he won’t see that. Because of the limited amount of time they spend together, what he doesn’t see rather than what he does could be enough for him to turn a passing attraction into full-blown infatuation.
I’ve seen it happen. Guys that are perfectly happy and in love with their girlfriends, start working closely with or move in a new girl, and because they only get to see the good side of her, start unrealistically comparing their girlfriend to her and convincing themselves she’s a better catch. Of course, it doesn’t last much past their first few fucks, because somehow she just doesn’t seem so great or fun anymore. But hey, what are you supposed to say, “Oh get over here you big lug, you had to try it out, to see for yourself. Boys will be boys!” Nuh- uh.

You can trust people. But when the temptation is staring them in the face……….. Can you? I mean if she was not allowing him to walk outside for fear he would run over and throw down the first female he came across, then yeah, she’s insecure. But allowing the situation?

We’d all still be in the garden of Eden if God hadn’t put that bloody tree there.

Doesn't seem like the GF really cares too much. Seems more like a territorial jealousy issue because it is clear she doesn't want him "hanging" around with her at her place and she doesn't seem inclined to spend any significant amount of time at his.

My line of thinking is if one of the people in a couple are having a hard time meeting there bills it would seem common sense for one person to move in with the other and rent out the one house. If things go sour he still owns his own home(depending if a 1 year lease is involved..ehh).
But if she is that scared of it and doesn't want to commit more maybe she should just back out of the relationship.

No. But no reason why he can't find a male roommate. Surely it's not just the female population going homeless?

How would the boyfriend feel if she were to get a male roommate?

I'm absolutely astounded at how so many people (such as commenter 'M') think that insecurity and lack of trust are perfectly fine things to have in a relationship.

A dozen years ago I was involved with a woman One day she spoke the 4 words that every man is most scared to hear: "We Need To Talk"

Little did I know what was in store. She said, "I know that what I have to say isn't necessarily fair but you always want me to be honest, right? Well, I'm not comfortable with you having any female friends and would like you to start discontinuing communication with them."

I swear to you, that's exactly what she said!

Surprise, surprise, I ended the relationship shortly after that.

From my mid-20s to early 30s I owned a house and needed a roommate to make ends meet. I almost always had female roommates. For me, it just worked better, and there was never anything romantic even though one of them was very attractive.

As for the worries that he'll be tempted because he'll only see the best side of his roomie - um, which best side is that? The one that leaves dirty dishes in the living room, or that is grumpy because she just failed a test? It's the opposite: you see all the annoying habits of roommates, and they don't bother to dress up and look nice for you.

This letter is all about control. Frankly, he ought to send her packing before she tries to take over the rest of his life as well...

I’m not saying this guy went out of his way to attract a female roommate so he can have his cake and eat it too. I’m sure he just needs a roommate and the woman was the only person who answered, and he’s happy with that. I am totally convinced this is just an innocent arrangement, with no ill intent on his part. If he was like that, I doubt ‘The Girlfriend’ would be his girlfriend at all.

However.

Although he would never want to cheat, here is a girl who may or not be as attractive as his girlfriend, it doesn’t really matter, but is NOT his girlfriend. Here is a girl who seems carefree, nice, funny, sexy, and ‘totally gets him.’ Oh yeah, his girlfriend is all those things too, but she’s his girlfriend. Not so much fun.
Guys enjoy the attention from the other girl without feeling obligated to take her out, compliment her, be there for her when she’s upset. Unlike his horrible shrew of a girlfriend, who was perfect up until the month before.
They delude themselves into thinking they really want this other person (Not just men, this also includes women equally) who compared unrealistically to their partners, are perfection personified. Of course, this is rarely the case, and often they realize their mistake after the damage has been done. They get caught up in the chase, the forbidden fruit angle, and forget all that kind of excitement fades with time.

Hey, it probably won’t happen. I could be rambling for nothing. But I know many men and women who threw away perfectly good relationships because they tricked themselves into thinking they were in love with the outer persona of someone. If they weren’t in that situation to start with, would it have ended up that way?

Who can say? It’s just a possibility.

I had a VERY possessive GF in my early 20's who had zero trust in me, which ultimately lead to me leaving her. Ironically though she rented a house with another guy, and when that lease ended they moved into another house together. I knew that there was nothing going on between them, but looking back realize that it was a case of 'do as I say' not 'do as I do'.

If 'The Girlfriend' above thinks she has the right to tell her boyfriend what he is or isn't allowed to do with regards to a lodger, then what's to stop him doing the same to her? And how will that make her feel?

If you don't trust your partner then you shouldn't really be together.

But no reason why he can't find a male roommate.

Please read the question. Only a woman has replied and the last time he tried to find others he got stuck with no roommate at all.

Personally, I can't (and I'm not desperate enough to) live in fear. If somebody wants to leave me, they will.

I did read it. If my partner was uncomfortable with something like that I'd look a little harder than one ad in the campus housing office.
Surely if it upsets her he'd want to do it?
He's supposed to love her. If my boyfriend told me wasn't comfortable with me living with another man, rather than let it eat at him and him worry, I’d just find a woman to move in.
This guy seems like a nice guy who just needs a roommate. But everyone here that has commented are making it seem like if he doesn’t take in the female roommate he’s relinquishing control! She’ll have the upper hand!
Why see it like that? Okay, her fears are unfounded, she doesn’t like the idea. It makes her worry. If she is worried all the time won’t that just strain the relationship? She’s not asking him to live in a bunker and never look at another woman, have no female friends, or walk over hot coals, she would just feel more comfortable if he lived with a guy. Why is that so horrible?

I'm with you, M. Amy's reasoning makes perfect, perfect sense ... to my head. My gut tells me something completely different. Rather than live with the constant, gnawing irritation of having to convince myself over and over that no, things are really perfectly okay (no, REALLY, they ARE perfectly okay), I'd run out of energy and end the relationship. Then I'd find a boyfriend who didn't move some chick in with him. Unfair? Certainly! But at least I'd sleep at night.

Think of it like cross-dressing. I don't think there's anything wrong with a man who engages in cross-dressing, I just wouldn't want to date one.

"She’s not asking him to live in a bunker and never look at another woman, have no female friends, or walk over hot coals, she would just feel more comfortable if he lived with a guy. Why is that so horrible?"

Take it from me M, first it's the little things, then possessive people start making bigger and bigger demands. For now it's having a female room mate, but it might be who he hangs out with in future. My ex back-handed me across the face at a party for talking to a 'strange woman'. Turns out she was my best friends' girlfriend, and things got even worse than that.

So the GF in question here is worried that her boyfriend will cheat on her so she's trying to stop anything that might tempt him. But how long can she keep that up, and at what point does she let his independence come before her comfort levels?

She doesn't trust him enough to have a female flat mate (regardless of what she says) and wants him to find a male flatmate instead. If her boyfriend concedes and gets a male flatmate is he in effect acknowledging that he can't be responsible and condoning his GF's behaviour?

Either he she does trust him or she doesn't and if she doesn't she should tell him and not talk about 'avoiding temptation', but that might just end the relationship.

Coming from someone with zero relationship experience, so take it for what it is.

That said, if my girlfriend decided to start dictating terms about what goes on in my house, she would cease to be my girlfriend in short order.

This is simply a variation of the old "Marry me mow or lose me forever" gambit.

The correct answer is always "Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!"

And this is something I feel comfortable saying even without knowing all the details of the relationship between LW and GF. If she feels that she gets a veto on his life now, it's not going to get better. If he's not worthy of her trust now, he never will be.

Ah, memories! I'm so glad all this crap is behind me now, because it was a real pain in the ass back then. Look ladies, if you don't trust the guy, you shouldn't be in a relationship with him. "It's not him I don't trust, it's other women." Bullshit. You don't trust him and you don't trust yourself to know whether or not you can trust him. Jealousy is a manifestation of your own insecurities, period. "If he really cared, he wouldn't do anything to make me jealous." How is he supposed to know what makes you jealous, and why should his every move be monitored by whether or not you're going to be jealous of it? Sorry, Amy's on target with this. It's a control issue manifesting out of her insecurities. Don't forget, each of us has to look at ourselves in the mirror every day, and if you can do that with a clear conscience, you shouldn't have to answer to any one else about it. Accusing someone of something you suspect them of doing isn't the same as having proof, and you cannot prevent someone from acting a certain way. All you can control is how you react to it. If the LW feels that her BF having a female roommate is a deal-breaker, so be it. She doesn't have the right to control who he has as a roommate, only he does. If she trusts him, it wouldn't be an issue. Ultimately, she's got to trust herself that she made the right choice when she chose her boyfriend. He's got to trust that he made the right choice, too. And they both have to trust each other, or it's a moot point anyway.

I have to go with M and Pirate Jo on this. Would it be great if she were secure enough to not care? Sure. But the fact that she isn't doesn't make her a psycho in training, either. Not every relationship issue has to end in one person getting the hell out of Dodge.

If the LW is not a control freak in general and just insecure about this issue, it doesn't seem unreasonable for him to bend. He can certainly try a little harder to find a roommate, or she can help him find a roommate. I don't know where they live, but I have a hard time believing only one person in the entire area is looking for housing.

"As for the worries that he'll be tempted because he'll only see the best side of his roomie - um, which best side is that? The one that leaves dirty dishes in the living room, or that is grumpy because she just failed a test? It's the opposite: you see all the annoying habits of roommates, and they don't bother to dress up and look nice for you."

I agree. The surest way to douse any preliminary flickers of attraction is to find someone's hair in the sink and see them unshowered in stained pajamas watching America's Next Top Model while eating icecream straight from the carton.

"I said I'm willing to meet her and see how I feel..."

So, basically, if she looks like a yeti it's OK?

I'm not saying the LW is a psycho--she actually admits calmly that she may be insecure (at least in her letter) and is actively seeking advice.

Whenever I start to feel jealous, I tell myself, "Maybe I can't control how I feel, but I can sure control how I react." ie, feeling a certain way does not justify unhealthy, unattractive behavior. There is nothing wrong with feeling jealous and insecure (we all do at some point), but there is something wrong with ACTING jealous and insecure.

"Accusing someone of something you suspect them of doing isn't the same as having proof, and you cannot prevent someone from acting a certain way."

This is true, but I didn't see the LW "accusing" her boyfriend of anything. She just doesn't want a boyfriend who lives with another woman. I don't see anything wrong with that - I wouldn't either. I also wouldn't want a boyfriend who smoked cigarettes or wanted children. That doesn't make me insecure, it just means I know what I want and won't settle until I find it. Besides, her boyfriend is in his mid-30's. This is a totally different game than being a 20-year-old college student. Maybe he should get a second job, a better job, or a more affordable house - why is he in his mid-30's and trolling campus bulletin boards for roommates anyway?

Oh for sure. If you are dating a woman who is Hitler in a skirt, who "back- hands you across the face" for talking to another woman, or makes you log in and out whenever you leave the house, congratulations lads! You won first prize in the psycho girlfriend raffle.

But does feeling uncomfortable that her boyfriend is living with another woman really define this woman as selfish and crazy in her demands? If your girlfriend or wife was living with another guy, can you honestly say you’d enjoy that? I’m sure you’d trust her, but wouldn’t you feel better if she was living with a woman?

I don’t understand how her not liking this situation transforms her into an evil dictator. She is a woman who does not like the fact her partner is sharing his personal space with someone who could possibly disrupt their relationship. She isn’t enforcing a curfew, planning out his days for him on the calendar, or telling him whom he can and cannot talk to. She is letting him know what does not feel right to her, and I would think as a couple they would discuss it and work out a compromise, not try to decide who is right, or what each of them are allowed to ask of the other.

Hey, it looks like the boyfriend may desperately need someone to move in and ‘The Girlfriend’ may just have to suck it up this time, but she does not have to like it. Maybe if it is that much of a problem she could pay the extra rent until he finds a guy to move in with him. However it works out, in perfect world no-one would have insecurities or doubts, and in that world when someone is committed they would not look at anyone but their partner no matter how attractive, and no accidents would ever happen.

Unfortunately, we don’t live there.

I can see where the LW is coming from, don't agree with it though. Younger guys do this all the time, I doubt this happens to older guys with more time on the ball of dirt. When your about to meet your gf or wife's former boy friend, consort, FB etc. shit happens. In your mind you picturing Brad Pitt with a shlong that makes John Holmes look small, a Porsche, a mansion, yacht, jet plane etc. I have built the shit up in my mind on more than one occasion. Only to learn that one was a really cool guy and the other one got pudgy and has his job due to his gf's dad.

Now my options were deal with it or get pissed off (sulk in a corner with a vodka and a smoke). Forbidding her from meeting them never occurred to me as an option. She's an adult so am I, why would I forbid her anything she's my wife not my daughter. My issue with the second one was jealousy of him and I have no problem stating it point blank when asked. The LW may have the same issue in that she's no longer a firm and fit college COED that guys stare at lustfully. The same shit that leads to many plastic surgery procedures.

why is he in his mid-30's and trolling campus bulletin boards for roommates anyway?

And therein lies the rub. The LW is insecure about him living with a coed, and there is every possibility she's justified about that. And I see your other points, too, but the bottom line is, she doesn't trust him. She hasn't accused him, yet, but the potential is there. So, in order to avoid that, he should be looking elsewhere for a roommate, if he wants to appease her. The operative phrase being "if he wants to appease her". Not saying he shouldn't want to, "if he really cares about her" but that if she truly trusted him, it shouldn't matter who his roommate is. On the other hand, that "trolling campus bulletin boards for a roommate" could raise a red flad with me, too, if he couldn't find a guy to rent a room.

Vlad, this situation isn't entirely comparable because your wife actually did have relationships with those men, but I'm curious: How would you feel if she wanted to live with her ex-boyfriend?

"Oh for sure. If you are dating a woman who is Hitler in a skirt, who "back- hands you across the face" for talking to another woman, or makes you log in and out whenever you leave the house, congratulations lads! You won first prize in the psycho girlfriend raffle."

Heh. Well there's a prize I wouldn't want to win again.

But my point was that it starts out with little things and slowly builds up. Being young and naive I thought being nice meant saying 'yes' so I helped dig myself into a hole. I'm sure the LW is nothing like my ex.

"Vlad, this situation isn't entirely comparable because your wife actually did have relationships with those men" Oh I know but I can see where she's coming from. I have had that mind set but my reaction was different.

"How would you feel if she wanted to live with her ex-boyfriend?" That depends on which one. The first guy I'd have no problems with what so ever. The second one, no but that has nothing to do with her, it's based on my disdain for him. Would I be worried about them hooking up. Not logically, she's a horrible liar and he thinks I'm homicidal. There might be a tiny bit of trepidation though.

Here's another annoying thing that *shouldn't* be a big deal, but would grate on my nerves anyway. If my boyfriend took on a female roommate, I would find myself keeping the information a secret from friends and family, just to avoid the inevitable raised eyebrows.

This is one of those questions where everybody's correct. M and LW are right to prefer avoiding any tempting situations. Amy is right to suggest trusting Boyfriend. Times like this, you have to fall back on the relationship's default setting: they're not married. Which means his financial situation is his own responsibility (as is hers). Which means LW can choose to get comfortable with his solution or leave. Not to say it has to be nasty - just could end up being an irreconcilable difference.

I heard a rumor that if that if a guy sees any pretty girl, he immediately has to have sex with her, no matter what. That's why I think all men should be blindfolded 24/7. That's the only way they can be trusted. Also because putting women in close quarters with men only causes them to lose their self control, I think women should be forced to stay around other women all the time and not be allowed to be alone with any men who aren't related to them. They shouldn't be allowed to talk to men because being nice may be misconstrued and men can't be trusted to control themselves. They should also cover up their bodies to limit temptation.

I think this women is being perfectly reasonable. If this man is in any close quarters with another woman, he may leave her and date this woman instead. So he should not only refuse to live with other women, he should not work with any other women closely or have close female friends he's not related to. That way he will never leave her.

The only way to stop your partner from cheating on you is to limit their options and keep them close to you. Remember, they can't be trusted to control themselves. I know a few people who were happy in relationships and moved in with members of the opposite sex, and ended up ending great relationships for the new friend. That proves that I am right. When people have the capacity to cheat , it's important that they be stopped from acting on that feeling by removing temptation from them. Partners should hover over them and screen possible cheatees from their path. This is what healthy and respectful relationships should be like. I applaud this woman for be willing to do this for her boyfriend and predict they will have a long and healthy relationship.

..... um. Ms. Lolly? Are you for real? Cause its really hard to tell sarcasm in text as dead pan as that. If you're being sarcastic, well, haha. If you're dead out serious, that's crazy talk. I'm scared, honest. The cling-for-dear-life-like-a-parasite strategy that you propose is a relationship murderer.

"We’d all still be in the garden of Eden if God hadn’t put that bloody tree there."

Okay, I've read all these posts through and through, and I think this little statement here perfectly sums up some certain misconceptions about guys. It works as a metaphor for all people, yes, but in this particular case, guys.

There's some women here who think that guys lose all self-control around hot women, to the point that rational thought isn't even in the equation. Sorry, but that's not true. At the very least, I can say its not true for me. I think this is a very carefully constructed illusion made for the men who DO cheat to cover for their blatant lack of respect for another's feelings. Yes, the sex drive is powerful, nobody is disputing that, I'm not foolish enough to propose as such. What I will say is that, when presented with an oppurtunity to cheat, I know that I can definitely think about it before hand. I'm not so incapacitated with lust that I just do the dirty deed.

If he's got this new hot roommate, and they uh, eat pizza and drink beet while watching t.v, and chemistry is involved, he'll make a decision, to cheat or not to cheat. If he does, well, that just shows his weak character. When I read the letter, though, that's not my judgement. He's not taking a female roommate because, hey, that's awesome. He's on the skids and needs a financial lift.

To be honest, if were the boyfriend, and I READ this letter, I think I'd just end it. It's been a year, she still doesn't trust me, and at that point never will. Apparently, she wouldn't want me around anyways, because she acts like its a burden to have me over her house all the time. I mean, if you say stuff like that, what's the point of being together?

Right you are Lolly. I especially like the part of her letter where she says just that, and that if her boyfriend doesn’t get back in his box “It will get the hose again”.

Why in a loving relationship is one partner not allowed to express concern at something they feel may hurt that relationship? It’s not about him looking at women, talking to women, talking about women, meeting up with friends who are women, making new friends who are women……………. It’s about him living with another woman. We all have our lines drawn in certain areas, and this obviously crosses the LW’s one.

No-one, especially the LW is saying he will cheat, or wants to. But when they have a fight, she’ll be imagining him and his roommate together. When she’s at home alone, she’ll be wondering what they’re up to. It would put a strain on their relationship, making things a lot harder and possibly contributing to a break up. So if she knows she’s going to feel this way, why can’t she say something?
She wouldn’t want to seem INSECURE. She should keep it all bottled up, to keep him happy. Lord knows, if he were put her at ease on this it won’t be long before before he’s sporting a collar and answering to Fido.

Amy, I completely agree with you. For instance, a lil personal story to relate. I'm a gay man that lived with several guys. They were all straight, but there was jealousy between my dates and them. And the rumor-mill was even worse for all of us. They would be accused of sleeping with me from their girlfriends. My current partner of 10 years was convinced for the longest time that we had relations at some point. I finally convinced him otherwise.

Finally, a girl moved in with me, and that was worse. The family started hoping I changed my ways, and then on top of that, they would say I was living in sin b/c I was not married to her.

No matter what, I had a no win situation. So, the point is, if the LW feels that way, she needs to get over her jealousy. It is a basic jealousy tactic. If she can't, he needs to find someone else or tell her he's gay. That'll shut her up until she drops by with fashion questions.

"Why in a loving relationship is one partner not allowed to express concern at something they feel may hurt that relationship?"

Nothing. But if the expressed concern becomes a demand...? That's a different story.

But again, are you being serious about Lolly's post? Are there really people who live there lives like watch dogs, wondering what the other person would do?

"No-one, especially the LW is saying he will cheat, or wants to. But when they have a fight, she’ll be imagining him and his roommate together. When she’s at home alone, she’ll be wondering what they’re up to. It would put a strain on their relationship, making things a lot harder and possibly contributing to a break up. So if she knows she’s going to feel this way, why can’t she say something?
She wouldn’t want to seem INSECURE."

Doesn't this seem like something she should work on instead of just accepting it as a fault and forcing change upon her partner? I' thinking that people would hold themselves accountable for their self perceived shortcomings rather than defering responsibility for others. This kind of behavior whether he gives in or not will not just vanish, it will manifest itself again next time she gets 'insecure'...

The real issue is the girlfriend not trusting her boyfriend. When it comes down to actually selecting a male room mate over a female room mate, will said male have to be in a relationship too, because a single man could be encouraging more "temptation" with his drinking and girlfriends hanging around than anything else. Maybe the room mate would even go out drinking with the boy friend.
So if a girl watching Oprah in her PJ's is an issue, so is a "strange" man partying and looking for some tail while the boyfriend hangs out in the corner when they go out for a few beers on a slow night (and if they are half way civil to one another they eventually will). The fact is, the situation is not comfortable (introducing strangers into your most personal spaces never is), but the issue isn't the situation, it is the girlfriend's lack of confidence in it.

I'm saying they should compromise somehow. I don't think him not having the female roommate will lead to the LW taking over his life.

Yeah, she should work on feeling insecure. But as I've said earlier, things can happen, it's not a crazy out- there insecurity. If she has real issues about it and is that ill at ease, bottling up feelings and allowing something to go on that will eat at her until she subconsciously ruins the relationship with them is not a good thing either.

And no, I am not serious about Lolly's post. It was a joke, right up to the 'silence of the lambs' quote. In my part of the world it's called 'taking the piss'.

M - how about an alternative to give you an idea of what she's asking here:

My boyfriend of a year has his own home, as do I. He needs a roommate to help pay bills, and only a homosexual guy has responded. He'll have his own bedroom, but they'll share a bathroom. He advertised in the campus housing office, so he must be young, or younger than I am (my boyfriend and I are both in our mid 30s). I have an issue with him having a gay roommate. What if we have a fight and he doesn't answer the phone? What if he drinks beers and plays video games with him? I trust him but believe in avoiding tempting situations. He insists he'll be at my place all the time anyway (which I've told him isn't fair to me), and says I'm just insecure. I said I'm willing to meet him and see how I feel, but he won't wait to see if others respond (he did once before and ended up stuck).

Now, the obvious undercurrent is still her fear of his cheating (that's the unspoken undercurrent in the LW's original question). Are her feelings just as valid in my rewriting of her letter? Should she be concerned that her boyfriend might sleep with the guy?

The issue here is not one of "he's putting a strain on the relationship by exposing himself to continuous temptation". It's one of "he's mine, and I am going to make samn sure nobody else has a crack at him".

The green monster has reared its ugly head.

Brian- Well, her obvious undercurrent isn't her fear of him cheating when you change it to a gay man, because she did not write that, you did. Maybe she'd be fine with that, how would you know? As far as I could tell her boyfriend seemed heterosexual, so why would a gay man bother her? There'd be no temptation there.

You cannot change her words to fit your opinion. Change woman/homosexual to donkey. Oh look, now she's worried he's into beastiality.

Change woman/homosexual/donkey to banana. Now that's just weird.

How about a female homosexual donkey eating bananas? Man, this LW's crazy!

It doesn't work that way.

Well put M (as to the last posting).

The opinions here are actually really interesting. I'm certain that age differences are affecting how people are saying they would theoretically respond to this situation. And I think maybe the LW is being given a hard time for something that would probably be a normal reaction. I mean can you really infer that she's an insecure control freak from a reaction to the situation?

I've also wondered if she's ever lived with a guy like a brother or anything like that. Because I think that people who grow up with members of the opposite sex (not counting Moms and Dads so much as brothers and sisters) adapt easier to those situations and are more normal in them. That might not make that much sense but it's just a thought.

Well for what it's worth M, I think you're making sense. When my gut rolls over in response to something, no, I don't have to let my emotions rule me. But I'd also be stupid not to listen to them. Why should the LW feel like *she* is the one with the problem, when her boyfriend has another woman moving in with him?

This just isn't the same situation as with a bunch of college kids. I dated a guy in college who lived in a house with four other guys and one girl (a complete hottie), and it never bothered me at all - the roommates in that place changed more often than the towels. This, on the other hand, is a guy in his mid-30's who has always had his own home during the time he and the LW have been together, and now he's fishing for a roommate on a college board. A grown man in his 30's shouldn't need a female co-ed roommate. At the very least, he needs to learn to budget more responsibly.

If I was in this LW's situation, I don't think I'd spend ten minutes "agonizing" over whether I trusted my boyfriend, over whether I had a self-esteem problem or insecurity issues, or whether it was "appropriate" for me to feel uncomfortable or not. There are a whole lot of men out there my age who don't live with other women, and I think I'd get a good night's sleep and then go find one of them.

It was NOT well put. It was stupidly put.

If she is concerned that close proximity to a college girl is going to lead him astray, then it doesn't really matter where it occurs or what form it takes. That's the point I made.

Where does it end? "I don't like you staying late at work with that cute young project manager." Or maybe "I'd prefer that you worked in an office that didn't have so many women in it."

How blatant does it have to be to get through your skull? Manipulation is manipulation. How is this different from "If you really loved me, you'd get rid of that dog."?

Has it occurred to anyone that the reason he posted on a college message board is that he wants a temporary boarder?

Post on Craigslist, and you could get a roommate who's looking for a 5-year place to live. College student (especially a senior or a grad student)? 6 months to a year, then they're gone.

I suspect he didn't do this for easy access to young pieces of ass. He's got a girlfriend with trust issues. They can either work it out, or split up. But until one of those things happens, this issue will come up over and over again.

Oh my God Brian, WHAT are you on about? Lol! Have you actually read any of the posts anyone's written? Or did you just skim down to the bottom to post your opinion?
Go read them again. And you don't have to get mad, we're all friends here, just with different views. Calm down.

I'll come back and amend my statement because I did not mean to put down one person's statement by telling another person that their's was well put. That being said, however, I do agree that you cannot change the LW's words to fit your opinion. You're probably going to think she's an unfit girlfriend no matter what.

I think it would be a good argument that maybe he's only looking for a temporary border except that it sounded (at least to me) like this was not the case. She may be projecting an insecurity here (I'm not saying she is but that is a possibility), but he's not exactly doing everything he can to create a better situation. I think it comes back to the fact that he's in his 30's and he's only posting on a college housing board. That is suspect in and of itself.

M:

Have you actually read any of the posts anyone's written?

Every word.

A:

I think it comes back to the fact that he's in his 30's and he's only posting on a college housing board. That is suspect in and of itself.

Why?

-----------------------------

Let me propose an alternate theory here. Perhaps there is a possibility that LW is over-reacting just a bit. She makes the assumption that a man in close proximity to a woman is a prelude to sex. Rather than argue that her assumption is perhaps not well-founded (she makes no mention of wandering eyes or hands in the excerpt), you simply assume the worst of the man involved, and having secured judgment move on.

Would you be so vociferous in your defense were the genders reversed? If so, why? If not, why not?

I'm 38. Were I to sublet a part of my house, would my motives be suspect if I took on a college student as a boarder versus an older person? Why?

My point here is that someone here is arguing from the wrong set of assumptions. I'm do not believe that I'm the one who is wrong though.

There's a saying something like "Jealousy is how much fun you THINK they're having", as if while the object of your jealousy is apart from you they are living some dream life, not scrubbing the floor, working overtime, jump-starting their car or picking up dog poop. Considering how many people say it's difficult to meet someone who makes them happy, LW has a tremendous imagination if she thinks the "hypothetical roommate" is Angelina Jolie's body double.

P.S. brian, you're correct.

Considering how many people say it's difficult to meet someone who makes them happy...

And THIS is where they make their mistake - it's not up to someone ELSE to make them happy!! They have to be happy with themselves in order to be happy with someone else. Until a person resolves that little detail, ain't no one born yet gonna make 'em happy. Why is it that so many people just don't get this? o_O

The last part of Pirate Jo’s most recent post is perfect. That is exactly what I am trying to say.
Everyone watches way too much Sex and the City. We all live in this TV world where everyone feels they have to be politically correct, socially aware, non- judgmental. (That’s why I read this column, I always find Amy not to be among these Tele- droids, this is the first topic I’ve ever not agreed with her about)

‘Oh don’t feel that way, you’re being insecure. It’s because of your insecurities. You have trust issues.’ Bullpies. Who started this word, insecurities? Was it Dr Phil or Oprah? Did Angel bring her babydaddy onto Maury because of the insecurities she felt because one of their kids were fathered by his brother? I think I missed that one.

She’s got to come to terms with her insecurities. To object to anything her partner does is intruding on his independence and right as an individual. She needs to identify her trust issues and embrace them, and take that negative energy she’s feeling and turn it into a positive. She’s got to own it. Waa waa waa.

Look, I think she has a valid point and a right to object. Personally I think her boyfriend has no intention of doing anything wrong and there could be many reasons why he posted on a uni student board, who knows? But it’s not a big ask to get a male roomie. Why turn it into a power struggle? If he is dead- set in getting this roommate, the LW must decide if she can live with that. If not, get a boyfriend who is not living with another girl.
But she has to ask herself; Why won’t he budge on this issue? And what will happen with later disagreements?

Anyways, it is almost 3am here and I have GOT to go to bed. When I debate I like to do it when I’m awake enough so I don’t accidentally misread comments or read them the wrong way. So I won’t be answering any comments directed at mine for a few hours, but I will be on tomorrow so we can debate further. Bye!

If this guy decides to let the college girl move in, I hope he does a background check on her first, as well as taking a good look at her character. Hopefully she will be a serious student that needs a place to live. Or she could be one of the girls from "Girls Gone Wild", who might try to pay the rent with a BJ, instead of the money the boyfriend was hoping to get to pay the mortgage. Either way, he's a grown up man now (since he's in his mid-30s) and gets to make his own decisions.

The LW is in a much better position than the potential roommate, no matter how hot she is, because of the grossness of actually living with another person, the details of which have been mentioned already by other posters. The LW will always look her best whe he sees her, and will be mysterious and desirable because she's not constantly underfoot.

But she has to ask herself; Why won’t he budge on this issue? And what will happen with later disagreements?

Why does he have to budge at all? That's the part I don't get. If a relationship is supposed to be based upon mutual trust, why does he have to give in here? Why should he admit that she has a right to not trust him alone with another woman?

That's what I'm on about here. I'm not talking any Dr. Phil mumbo-jumbo here. She doesn't trust him. She's made that abundantly clear.

Why does he have to validate her lack of trust by giving in?

I was in early stages of a doomed relationship last year when 3 of my male coworkers came to do a working visit - we live across the planet. I have a huge house - this immature 49 yr old insecure guy I was involved with at the time could not handle it - just the fact that these male persons were in my house... It was so absurd - I am like 50, my website coworkers are about 30, they would be the last people I would want to get involved with. It was so stressful and such an intrusion for my ex to bother me with his jealousy... showed how we were different and turned out we could not breech that, it was more like stalking-lite or insisting on peering at my life all the time than the respect I need and expect to give. A roomate is an economic decision and a social formal relationship that sometimes turns into great friends. LW is controlling.

I have frequently had male roomates between husbands, somehow I kind of prefer it, they tend to be more neat and safe than girls (who tend to have unsafe boyfriends) -- of course you need to interview people carefully.

Depending on where these guys live I find University boards are very good places, he´s not necessarily a pedofile - yeah Craigs list can be better but I always scout U´s having moved alot internationally - and like Amy says it could well be a professor, a professional, or a grad or med student - they are perfect roomates as they are predictable and have steady income.

Ah, what the feminist movement has wrought. So, basically she wants to maintain her independence but get all the trappings of being the "wife".

Both parties could easily turn this into a power struggle:
LW's BF: If you trusted me, you'd not give me shit about this.
LW: If you loved me, you'd get a male roommate.

Ultimately, it may just be a matter of who cares more. My boyfriend kinda wanted to see the new Indy movie over the weekend. I really wanted to see Iron Man. We saw Iron Man. Not because I'm a domineering control freak, but because I wanted Iron Man more than he wanted Indy. I "won." He "submitted." Next time, it will be the other way around. It's just not an epic battle between good and evil.

I think LW feelings are completely normal. I think most people would be concerned or at least a little bothered if someone attractive moved in with their significant other. However just because it's normal doesn't mean it's reasonable or even makes any sense. If she concerned about him straying, it would apply to every attractive female he crosses paths with. Temptation is everywhere...not just in your home with your roommate. You can't help/force/request your partner to avoid temptation. I am actually an advocate for temptation. I don't want my boyfriend with me because he doesn't come in contact with other attractive females. I want him with me because he chose me out of all of the attractive females. That's not to say I don't ever feel jealous or insecure. But I have to trust that he wants to be with me, regardless of his living situation. Who he lives with is his problem...and THANKFULLY not mine.

I think Monica brought up a good point in that not every argument or disagreement has to be this epic battle. In this case, this one battle or problem in their relationship doesn't necessarily mean she's a control freak or he's being a pushover if he decides to try for a male roommate. Why does it have to be so black and white?

M, the problem I'm having here is that there is no indication at all in the LW's letter that she is willing to either help with the situation or make any kind of compromise. I assume the BF has tried other routes of finding a roommate -- believe me, if I were looking for a roommate, a college student is about the last type of person I'd want to take in (odd hours, excess partying, constant string of BFs/GFs in and out, never pays rent on time -- hey, I was a college student once!). So it looks to me like a last-gasp desperation solution. And what is the LW doing to help resolve the situation? Apparently nothing. She isn't willing to move in with him, and she doesn't particularly want him at her place at all. She doesn't seem willing to help him out financially (can't say that I blame her for that, actually), and there's no indication that she's done anything to try to help him find a roommate that would be more suitable in her mind. He already tried once to appease her and do it her way, and he wound up taking it up the wallet. She isn't doing anything to help -- all she's doing is making demands.

And Monica, yes, it is a control thing (the LW's situation, not yours). And yes, if he doesn't take the female roommate, she wins and he loses. And yes, she will make further demands about who he's allowed to associate with when and where. (I've seen this movie before...) Meanwhile, she's more or less barred him from her place. Does he have the right to ask, "Why can't I come to your place? What are you doing over there that you don't want me to know about?"

P.S.: I did think loopy's post was brilliant satire. And you all do realize what it was satarizing, right?

This has been an interesting debate. On the one hand, you've got people extolling the virtues of trust in a relationship and the negative effects of being controlling. On the other you've got people exclaiming that [hypothetical] hot chick temptation could be too great for any man to resist, plus boyfriend isn't respecting girlfriend's feelings.

Till I typed that, I wasn't sure which side I was on. But now, I'm sure--I'm on the side of trust, and against being controlling. The girlfriend is overreacting to what amounts to a hypothetical situation. She's trying to dictate to him his living situation, as well. But the real problem is that she is making her own insecurities into her boyfriend's problem, rather than her own. SHE is insecure. That doesn't mean that a person in a relationship with her NEEDS to behave according to her dictates. It's clear she thinks that yes, it DOES mean he has to do what she says--that he can only act according to what will allay her feelings, and trust doesn't enter into it. Now, there are plenty of guys out there who are willing to act according to her dictates, and I'm sure she'll find just such a guy to date after her inevitable breakup with this other guy. But for now, the solution is for her to examine why
she's so freaked out about this, and why she wants him to rearrange his life around her fears. Now, this doesn't mean that in every relationship, there should be the same result. As Brian says:

Why does he have to budge at all? That's the part I don't get. If a relationship is supposed to be based upon mutual trust, why does he have to give in here? Why should he admit that she has a right to not trust him alone with another woman?

So there are some relationships where a compromise could be amicably reached. In others, it's a dealbreaker. For me, it would be a dealbreaker. For her, the dealbreaker is that her boyfriend won't cave in to her on this.

I'm also wondering where the idea that this would be a deal breaker for her came up? She didn't say so in her letter, in fact it seemed like she was genuinely asking for advice (as opposed to other letter writers who tell us what they plan to do or have already done and are looking for validation of their actions). She basically told us a brief overview of the situation, told us her feelings and his response, and asked where to go from there. I think Amy gave her good perspective on what to think about and possibly what her reactions might be caused by. This is just like any other issue that couples sometimes come up against. I still don't think this makes her a controlling psycho.

Its a tricky one and I can see both sides as others have mentioned. There's going to have to be a compromise. The LW can't help worrying, and it sounds like she's communicated that to him. However, given the status of her relationship with the bf, including the fact that she obviously doesn't want him at her place all the time, she has no right to say anything else about the matter. Its the bfs right to rent to whomever he wants, but now that the LW has communicated her unease its up to him to what, if anything, he's willing to do to allay her unease. How they both react to this early challenge may well determine the future of their relationship, or lack thereof. For the LW the trusting part may end up being a leap of faith.

Lolly: your post totally rocks. As I was reading I was thinking, "Brilliant sarcasm. No wait, she's serious! No, wait ... " And dammit, I'm still not 100% sure.

Looks like it's a matter of degree here. So if the roomy is pug ugly her living there is fine? If she had said I'm not comfortable with you living with a women then I'd say it maybe some philosophical issue kind of like Orthodox Judiaism. To all of those that say she has a point: Would it matter if the guy/girl in your situation was ugly as hell?

Wow. Just . . . wow. I'm sort of guessing that lots of these folks live somewhere other than San Francisco or New York (or other super expensive tough housing markets). In both of those cities, I have taken whatever roommate I could find who was financially responsible, not an obvious drug addict, and didn't smell too funny. Gender? Hotness? Dude. I have bills to pay. I am not scamming for hotties, I am looking for a way to avoid getting evicted. Okay, I did make out with one of my female roommates once, but apparently same-sex canoodling doesn't bother the LW, so that doesn't go to her point.

I think its a great idea, where can I find one of these hot female roommates that screws all night drinks beer and watches movies (hopefully porn)and walks round the house naked. Bit of luck and she'll have lots of hot friends that stay over for all night orgys.
If LW was half decent in bed herself she wouldnt be worried

Re: Al - your post was pretty funny, even witty, right up until "orgys" (sic). Unfortunately that last line just negates everything else.

The new prophet Lolly has spoken. No cartoons making fun of Lolly or its off with your head!!

mmmm i thought the last line was the main point actually. It appears to me that her fear is of the roomies having sex, to me that equals that she is insecure about the quality or quantity of their sex life, also indicating that she feels he may need more........I agree with this comment from Amy.
You'd actually have more control by relinquishing control. Instead of telling him what to do in other relationships, show him why he wouldn't want to do anything that jeopardizes yours. It's really the best way of seeing to it that there's no woman he'd rather open a dented can of beans for: "Au poivre, darling? Or would you prefer tartare?"

If you dont feed your dog and he starts to sit on the neighbours porch because they give him scraps, do you kick the dog, get rid of your neighbours or just feed your dog.
My reasoning on female jealosy and bitchiness is that many women use sex as a reward/punishment system, typically the controlling types. So it must be infuriating for them to be training their dog by withholding his feed, when he can just walk next door and get allsorts of juicy morsels to munch on. Of course the reality is that the dog will not get fed next door and the BF wont find a naked hot nympho for a roomie.
I have to run to kids soccer training now...........not because im the coach but because ill be knocking off all the hot mums down there in between training the kids

Cousin Dave's comment that the LW is not taking part to help at all made some good points. I would think that a person in a relationship would be around a bit and help, and be at the other person's house and be a presence if they have a good thing going. The lack of that sort of help or mention of potential presence seems telling. But then again, we don't really know that much about the relationship.

Only time I ever had a similar thing was in college, when I rented a house with a friend. The week before we were to move in she told me her boyfriend would be living with us. I liked him, and I was always at school anyway spending nights working in the design lab, so it was ok with me. My boyfriend, who is now my husband, was totally against it, which caught my attention because it was unusual for him to take a stand on things like who to room with. I asked him if he thought the bf would hit on me or if he didn't trust me, and he said it was neither...that he thought my friend was kind of a flake and that the bf would be running the household, and I would soon be either miserable or have to make a stand and move after all the good off-campus housing was taken. I scoffed, said that wouldn't happen, because we had schedules so different and went ahead with it.

A month later, the bf was running the house, and even with our different schedules and me hardly ever there...if I was there, I was told I was intruding on their privacy. I was a very small footprint roommate, a little corner in the fridge and nothing left laying around, no dishes in the kitchen no nothing in the bathroom, but it was too much for them. If I staked out a little corner to study, it was a corner they needed. My bf had been right and all the good off-campus housing was taken. I was in a stage of my life where I was a hard charger in jobs and school, but still let my friends run over me. This situation helped me turn the corner on that. I asked the guy living with us if he still had his old apartment, and he did. So I told him that I wanted to get out as much as they wanted me out, and I would trade my half of the house lease for his apartment but we had to do it legally and get his name on and my name off, and if he didn't agree to that I would contact our landlord and let him know that things had changed for the worse without his (the landlord's) consent and we would all be out on our asses. He saw the light, introduced me to his landlord, and we changed all the leases and went on with our lives. And I got a kick-ass apt out of the deal for less than what I paid for half the house that I couldn't really live in. It was a good experience to go through, and valuable for later years when friends have mistaken 'kind' for 'pushover'.

I think people sometimes just act as if things are happening to them with no idea of how to step in and do something about it. The LW sounds like she is scared about things going wrong in the relationship that have nothing to do with who her bf has for a roommate. As many people have said so far, she will eventually have to decide whether or not she trusts him, and demanding input on his living conditions will probably not get her there.

Ang, your comments always show you to have some real wisdom. If there were many more of you, I'd be writing brochures!

People crack me up!! Literally! While I can see both sides of this argument, it comes down to something more important. Decide what you can live with regardless of what anyone else's opinion is. If you are so worried about temptation, he is aware of your feelings, still does it, then the ball is in your court. Is it a situation that is livable for you? Is it a deal breaker? Whether he cheats or not is besides the point. It makes you uncomfortable, whether you are right or wrong. If he is spending so much time at your place, where is the relationship going? Why not move in together and rent or sell one house? Not ready for that? Don't want that? Then let him get whatever room mate he wants. Decide for yourself if he is what you want or not outside of who he lives with. That really is what is going on here. If you have to communicate with an advice columnist (not that there's anything wrong with that) doesn't that say something about the communication, or lack of, in the relationship? You trust him or you don't. You want him or you don't. I've never been one for ultimatums, but this comes down to, "I can live with this situation or I can't." Only the girlfriend can decide. If she can't, she should move on and wish him well. Isn't it really that simple?

Of course she shouldn't control who he hangs out with or let her jealousy take over where her rational thought should be. I think that everyone feels jealous sometimes but feeding it is a bad idea. Her taking issue in this might be a red herring for other issues in the relationship. She may want to take a look to see what other issues exist.

In my vast experience of one relationship :P, I had that happen. I ended it because I let myself get jealous of a girl who he had had a flirtation going on with from before he had even met me. But after we broke up, upon looking back, I reallized that there were lots of other issues in the relationship and ways in which things weren't going well.

When I first met "the other woman" she was at first hostile towards me, in refusing to shake my hand when I offered it and stating coldly, "I know who you are." Then after that pretended that I didn't exist. When she would run into us, she would enthusiastically greet him and then physically stand in between us with her back to me while she referred to inside jokes that they'd had from before. I am nonconfrontational. So I would just walk away and go talk to someone else. My boyfriend would extricate himself from her and come and join me with my conversation in less than a minute. She would then glare at me and usually leave the area. She once confronted me when he wasn't htere and accused me of hogging him and limiting his time with her. l told her that he was free to do what he wanted and had just chosen to leave her because I had never spoken to him about her. She didn't like hearing that much. So I thought that things were okay. But some of my friends told me that he would flirt with her when I wasn't there. I decided that I wasn't comfortable with the situation and I confronted my ex about (which was hard for me) and I told him I didn't even know what to ask him butt he needed to somehow make it clear to her that he was committed as my boyfriend and not available for flirtations. I told him I was fine with him still being her friend and hanging out.

He was very defensive about the situation acted like I was the one doing something wrong. Then I asked him if he even noticed how badly she acted towards me and he said that he hadn't but now that I brought his attention to it, he did. Then I asked him what he was going to do about it and he said he didn't know. So then I told him that I was not going to just ignore her bad treatment of me anymore. His response was that if I was rude then it would embarrass him as she has been his friend for a long time and is kind of the queen bee of his group of friends. I wasn't comfortable being in a situation in which he was okay with her doing anything to me and yet would be embarrassed if I even looked at her cross-eyed. So I broke up with him, which to my surprise was a shock to him. After we broke up, he said that if he didn't think of her at all in a romantic way and that he still liked me and that he hadn't wanted the relationship to end. I agreed to being on a break for a while but we ended up not getting back together as some other issues came up.
I am now glad that his friend was so horrible because I had blinded myself to some real issues in the relationship. He would a lot of times make life decisions without discussing. We'd previously attended church together...not every week but about once a month or so. When we'd started dating he had said that church was important to him. But one week, after I noted that we hadn't in a while, he announced that a few weeks prior, he'd decided that he didn't want to attend church anymore ever. Another time, he invited me to go with him to the imax theatre. I asked if we needed tickets and offered to check it out. He said "No. Let me take care of everything" Then we showed up that night and it turned out that we had needed to buy tickets ahead of time and he hadn't. These incidents would have been alright isolated..but they were the norm of our communication.

We had only been dating a couple months when his family invited me and my family to come have Thanskgiving at their house. He acted really hurt when I told him we were already going to my grandma's house. Also, after 3 months of dating, his mom had put up pictures of me in their home. One of which was in a frame that had the word "Family" and besides me was only family members. Him going so quickly in some directions while so completely shutting me out in other ways was not something I liked or if I had thought about it is something I want in a boyfriend. And so I almost want to thank his friend for behaving so horribly because it woke me up to the fact that things were not all well in the relationship. I had really liked him for a long time before we had been dating and I think that it blinded me to the fact that his adhd and my need for caution and security didn't mesh well.

Lily, I think your experience raises another point: That we need to find someone whose special brand of "crazy" we can deal with. We all have a special combination of character traits that has the potential to drive someone else up the wall. Insecurity is a deal breaker for some. For others, if all the other ingredients blend well together, insecurity isn't so bad.

And it sounds like you got out of a bad situation if you were with a guy who wouldn't defend you and wouldn't allow you to defend yourself.

I have to agree with M and Pirate Jo. In this day and age, when even priests are molesting children and "nice" guys like Scott Petersen murder their wives, why should we really trust anyone?!

I don't get this "If you don't blindly trust your man, you're a psycho or an emotional weakling." After all, Stacy Petersen blindly trusted her husband. Now, she's dead to show for it. The fact is people do things that are way out of character - or what you think is their character -all the time. Sometimes, it's just because they're drunk and tempted to take advantage of a convenient situation. Living with someone is a very intimate situation. Since when are we supposed to be so blaise about out partner hanging out with a member of the opposite sex in his or her pajamas?

I don't think the LW is crazy to voice her discomfort. Relationships are stressful enough without adding the additional stress of worrying about what might or might happen under those conditions. She's just asking that he respect her enough not to add that doubt to the equation. You guys who claim to be so secure wouldn't be thrilled with your lady hanging out with a hot roomie in his boxers first thing in the morning. You're kidding yourselves!

"Living with someone is a very intimate situation. Since when are we supposed to be so blaise about out partner hanging out with a member of the opposite sex in his or her pajamas?"

I guess I just don't see living with the opposite sex as being a huge deal, and I'd venture a guess that a lot of people agree with me--not necessarily all, but living with the opposite sex is not always "intimate." For several months (while waiting for a more permanent living situation), I lived with a male friend-of-a-friend. Separate bedrooms. 1.5 bathrooms. Saw each other in our pajamas/robes/towels a lot. Saw him w/o his shirt and, yes, in his boxers quite often. He was good looking, but not really my type. Maybe I am "blaise," but I saw it as no big deal and had a boyfriend for part of that time.

...and by the way--things didn't end with that boyfriend because I lusted after my roomie. They ended because I began lusting after a guy I met at a bar. You don't get to pick who you become attracted to. Sure, there's a chance the LW could fall for the roomie--just as he could one of his coworkers, the girl on the bus, etc, etc, as Amy says. But the chance that he could end up lusting after his roomie does not give the LW grounds for deciding who he lives with--just as it gives her no grounds to decide who to work with/hang out with/what bus route to ride.

Now, let's say, after the roomie moves in, the LW's BF starts bailing on his girlfriend and spending a lot of time with the roomie. Then, the LW would do well to voice her displeasure--not because the roomie is a woman, but, because he's being a crappy boyfriend (he could just as easily ditch the LW to go to the bars with a guy roomie).

But, as it stands, she does not own the house. She does not pay the bills/utilities. And she does not "own" the boyfriend. She has 2 choices: acknowledge that he can live with whomever he pleases or break up with him.

I don't know why people were having trouble telling if Lolly was being satirical or not in his/her response. It was clearly an exaggerated, ridiculous situation that could never be a reality. Particularly here:

I heard a rumor that if that if a guy sees any pretty girl, he immediately has to have sex with her, no matter what. That's why I think all men should be blindfolded 24/7. That's the only way they can be trusted. Also because putting women in close quarters with men only causes them to lose their self control, I think women should be forced to stay around other women all the time and not be allowed to be alone with any men who aren't related to them. They shouldn't be allowed to talk to men because being nice may be misconstrued and men can't be trusted to control themselves. They should also cover up their bodies to limit temptation.

But to avoid confusion in future, Lolly, I think when you're being satirical you should make the situation so outrageously unrealistic that no one could possibly be stupid enough to think that such a thing could ever exist. For example, I'd rewrite the paragraph above to read something like: In order to make sure men don't become overwhelmed with their desires towards women, women should be kept behind closed doors at all times, in the home. In any instance in which a man sees her, she must be covered head to toe in thick cloth such that nothing of her figure may be seen. Furthermore, she should be prevented from going anywhere through the withholding of access to independent transportation, such as one has when driving a car. She should be forbidden in public from being in the presence of any man not related to her, unless there's a relative there to guard her. She should be forbidden from any but the most basic education in order to prevent her from circumventing any of these regulations. Any woman found not obeying these regulations must clearly be doing so because she wants to have sex with any random guy. She is therefore a loose woman and any man can have sex with her, whether she claims to want to or not. (And claims to not want to are clearly lies, because if she really didn't want to, she'd never have deviated from these rules to begin with). Given this, there's really no need for men to be blindfolded--why should men have to be punished just because of their own natural impulses? Natural impulses are there to be obeyed! It's up to women to keep those impulses from kicking in through preventing temptation.

I don't think the LW is saying she "has the right" to tell him how to live or whom to live with. She's just saying that until she meets this woman - and is convinced there is no attraction between them - she's uncomfortable.

I, too, have lived with a male roomate - a good friend at the time. He was attracted to me, but it wasn't mutual. I later learned that he implied to others that there was more going on than friendship. This came back to hurt me with a boyfriend at the time, who heard the rumors. So, my roomie successfuly sabotaged my relationship.

Of course, I also know cases without any problems. So, let's face it, it really depends on who the people are and what their underlying intentions might be. I mean, her 30 yr old boyfriend advertised on campus for a much younger coed! The LW has a healthy instinct to be a little suspcious at this point. That is all I'm saying.

I just feel that we are not being particularly liberated women to say to her, "Well, you have no right to listen to your instincts. You must trust him regardless or you're a weak person."

To me, that's the equivalent of the kind of patronizing way women were treated in the past. "Don't worry your pretty little head about it. Accept whatever the man says because if you're a worthy girlfriend, and a secure person, you'll trust him."

Would we have said that to Stacy Petersen? "Stacy, he's your husband. You must TRUST him! Sure, he takes a lot of business trips, but...dont worry you're pretty little head about it. Just be secure in yourself"

To me, that's going backwards! We should empower women by letting them know it's ok to listen to their instincts, to keep a healthy distrust until their fears are settled.

Most likely, this roomie isn't a hot seductress, who poses any sort of threat to their relationship, but until she is settled in that assessment, she SHOULD have a concern. I have more respect for that than if she was some blindly trusting girlfriend swallowing anything her guy says.

The point here, lovly, is that if she doesn't trust him after a year, then how well does she really know him?

As far as Stacy Petersen? The guy was suspected of doing something untoward to his first wife. She would have been wise to not trust him. She listened to her heart instead of her head and it got her killed.

I'm not saying that she should trust him. Her mistrust doesn't necessarily make her weak (although she may be weak, controlling, or both). I'm saying that if she doesn't trust him now, then she oughtn't stay with him.

Actually, I meant Lacy Petersen, who seemed to have the fairytale life with a "great guy". Even her parents and friends were fooled for many years.

So, I don't believe a year is really enough to know someone, at least to the point of having unconditional trust, which is what so many posters seem to view as the sign of mental health and relationship stability.

She doesn't have to leave him! Like I said, her fears are most likley unfounded, but I don't think it's irrational for her to have them. There are a lot of dishonest, manipulative people out there. It's foolish to act like every guy who swears to his girlfriend that his intentions are pure should just be believed without question -unconditionally - or we're going to JUDGE HER as mentally weak and/or controlling. How fair and progressive is that?

Life is neither fair nor progressive. You're right - there are choices to be made here. And on both sides, there are potential negatives to such choices.

LW can accept it, whine about it, confront him about it (meaning force the issue), or leave him over it.

He can allow the female roommate and accept the impact on his relationship, he can deny the female roommate and do ditto, or he can leave her.

Either way, this is going to be a point of contention for the duration. If she's unwilling to take him at his word and see if he fucks up, at what point is she going to let him out of his cage long enough to see if he can be trusted on his own? If he's willing to be badgered now, will he continue to do so, or will he blow up at her the next time?

It can probably be worked out, but there is no way that either side can give in completely and save face.

Another thing. Stacey Peterson - she was the wife of the cop whose previous wives departed under suspicious circumstances, yes?

There were probably warning signs that Scott Petersen (sp?) was fucked in the head. There's always warning signs. Most people just don't see them because humans don't see things they don't want to.

>I have to agree with M and Pirate Jo. In this day >and age, when even priests are molesting children >and "nice" guys like Scott Petersen murder their >wives, why should we really trust anyone?!

>Actually, I meant Lacy Petersen, who seemed to have >the fairytale life with a "great guy". Even her >parents and friends were fooled for many years.

So what's your point? That you can't trust anyone, so you should watch them like a hawk and have them check with you for how they do everything as a result? How's that going to work. With the genuinely evil guys like Scott Peterson and Drew Peterson, that would hardly have been an effective way of learning who they truly were. In fact, in both cases, there was likely some warnings, that were ignored. Both guys were charming; both guys were controllING. Scott Peterson had numerous affairs while living with Lacey and pretending to be the devoted husband. I guess what I'm saying is that a) you're right, you can't necessarily trust people to be telling the truth and acting well, but b) the way to ensure that they're not cheating on you is NOT to watch them like a hawk and dictate their living conditions. I sympathize with LW, but while her lack of trust in her boyfriend may be understandable, the solution is NOT to dictate to him how he will live. At some point, you've just got to start trusting them. That's what trust is--accepting that you believe this person, evidence or not, regardless of circumstances. (oh, and FYI: Lacey Peterson had two serious boyfriends in her life--her high school boyfriend, and her college boyfriend/husband, Scott. We all know how Scott turned out. But her high school boyfriend... is also currently in prison for killing someone! It was manslaughter, but still--Lacey Peterson was 0 for 2 in her ability to judge boyfriends. Or is that 2 for 2, in that she was able to pick out the charming, outwardly nice, inwardly devious and violent guys quite well, and quite subconsciously? And no, I'm not blaming her for her fate, it's just a fact about her that astounds me.)

Let me get this straight. Lacey Petersen should've seen the "warning signs" and she's just a bad judge of character because she didn't foresee her high school boyfriend would also end up being convicted of manslaughter?

Yet, this LW says to us, "Isn't it kind of off that my boyfriend doesn't want a male roomate, but insists on taking a female roomate much younger than me? Is that possibly a sign I should worry about?" And she's immediately attacked.

I've had experience with a very manipulative partner. And anytime my instinct told me he was lying, not only would he deny it, but a lot of my friends were singing exactly the same chorus: "You have no PROOF. It's just your 'insecurity'. You should trust him!"

Do you know how hard it is to actually get PROOF? You have to practically walk in on the guy in bed with somebody before you could truly PROVE your suspicions - and, even then, the Scott Petersen's of the world would find a way to justify or deny their actions. They'd make you doubt you even saw what you what you saw!

I'm not saying this guy is like that. He's probably not. But you all are living in some fantasy world where every cheat and liar gives you the proper "signs"...and all you have to do is "read them" and you'll know you can't trust him - and you're an idiot if you don't. That is completely naive. It may make you feel more secure in your own relationships, but it isn't true.

That said, I'm not a cynic. There are many trustworthy people, and especially after experiencing the reverse, you do learn to see certain signs - both positive and negative - that can help you evaluate who to trust. But, if you look at the world, it's not usually so black and white.

There is a lot of deceit out there. People do cheat and lie. I have no idea whether this LW has enough experience to judge whether her situation is positive or negative. All I know is that she feels, in her gut, that there is something possibly wrong and disrespectful about her boyfriend's choice to have a young female roomate, even when he knows it makes her uncomfortable.

There are basically two scenarios here: a) He is so untrustworthy that he really doesn't give a damn about her feelings and figures he can get away with having something on the side - because he sure isn't going to CONFESS to having a fling with his roomate! - or b) he is so trustworthy that he finds her concerns silly and wants to prove to her that there's nothing at all to worry about because he only loves her and has no interest in this new roomate.

Yet, I really can't see, from her letter, how any of you can "know" which scenario is true. But you are very judgemental of her, which isn't fair. Especially if you honestly feel the Lacey Petersens of the world should've seen the "warning signs". She is giving you a potential "warning sign" and all you do is tell her how insecure and crazy she is!

That is exactly why women get hurt. They find no support for their suspicions or allegations. Abused women married to guys who look "nice" aren't believed. He looks "too nice". There are "no signs". You have "no reason" not to trust him. Well, often there ARE no "signs" or "reasons" - it's just instinct!

I didn't say she WAS insecure, but that the probability was high that this was a control gambit.

Nowhere did she say that he refused or did not want a male roommate. Just that a female was the only respondent thus far.

I'm coming from the other side of this. I've seen the manipulation women try on men. And I've seen men respond both ways - and the ones who gave in the first time wound up spending the rest of the relationship in chains.

As far as gut goes, it's usually pretty obvious when someone's a piece of shit. One big problem is that many people are too "nice" and don't want to hurt someone's feelings by telling them that their SO is a pile of steaming excrement dressed up in a nice suit. Another one is people want so badly to believe in "love" that they ignore their gut and believe the lies that their heart tells them.

Let me get this straight. Lacey Petersen should've seen the "warning signs" and she's just a bad judge of character because she didn't foresee her high school boyfriend would also end up being convicted of manslaughter?

Um, no, lovlysoul. That's why I explicitly said I'm not blaming her. But that there were warning signs, not of murder, but of problematic personality traits, Lacey and Stacy missed--both Petersons (Scott and Greg) were controlling, and deflected criticism with charm, which is manipulative. Behavior that is manipulative and controlling is not only a warning sign, but is, in and of itself, potentially abusive. So you don't need proof that someone is cheating--proof that they're being manipulative should be enough to tell you that this is not a good person to have an intimate relationship with. Why is cheating the sign to leave someone, rather than manipulation and control? Manipulation and being controlling are worse, in my view. And not trusting someone is also grounds for breaking it off with someone. That's why her behavior (while not insanely controlling, but slightly controlling) raises some flags for me--not necessarily awful, not enough to condemn her, but at least questionable. If she had literally said the things you paraphrase--"Isn't it kind of off that my boyfriend doesn't want a male roomate, but insists on taking a female roomate much younger than me? Is that possibly a sign I should worry about?"--then that would be signs of a problem on the part of the guy. But those were not her words. Her words were: "I have an issue with him having a female roommate. What if we have a fight and he doesn't answer the phone? What if he drinks beers and watches movies with her? I trust him but believe in avoiding tempting situations." Her phone-answering worries just seem paranoid. If he's not answering the phone, then he's cheating on her??? Drinking beer and watching movies are worrisome???? What? They could lead to dancing? 'I trust him, but then I think this other thing that indicates I don't trust him'???? You're right, we don't actually know which of those two scenarios (he's untrustworthy or he's trustworthy) are the genuine situation. But I'm sticking with the view that her concerns are as voiced by her, silly. Unless she can come up with something more concrete than she's mentioned, I'm not thinking much of her fears.

I don't know that Scott Petersen was viewed as particularly controlling. Her parents thought he treated her great and even supported him after her disappearance. In hindsight, it's easy to say that there were "warning signs", but clearly most of her closest relations didn't see them at the time.

My point isn't about that case, except to demonstrate that the signs aren't often so clear.
We like to believe that things like that can't happen to us because we'll see the "signs", but in my experience, that just isn't true. It's like saying you'll never have an accident because you're a good driver. We tell ourselves that so we can have the courage to get on the road, but the truth is, it's a lot more random.

All you normally have is just a gnawing suspicion, which could merely be insecurity. And it's really hard to leave a seemingly good relationship based on that alone. I wouldn't counsel anyone to end a relationship based on having a momentary doubt. So, it's not as easy a saying "If you don't trust him, then leave!" Obviously, a part of her doesn't trust him, despite what she says.

There are moments in every relationship where the trust is tested. To pretend to have no doubts, and that you should always trust your partner, to me, defeats this process. Of course, we have doubts! It's normal and wise. It's our self-protective reflex. Especially after only a year, she SHOULD still be questioning him.

The best thing that can happen in their relationship is for her to communicate her feelings - which she has. I don't believe she's done so in a particularly controlling way or that it means she's going to become some miserable hag. She is just saying, "I feel vulnerable."

His response will be the most telling. If he has nothing to hide, he'll be happy for her to meet the new roomate, who's probably not even attractive. If his motives aren't so pure, then maybe he'll make some issue of her "insecurity" and "attempts to control him".

In fact, that is the true "warning sign". A controlling, manipulative person will turn things around on her and make it about HER issues. Then, she'll feel guilty for even questioning him....and back down.

My only complaint is that we've already done that for him.

In other words, you've already decided that the burden of proof lies with him. He needs to prove that he's not up to no good.

I guess the presumption of innocence is right out in relationship land, eh?

"You guys who claim to be so secure wouldn't be thrilled with your lady hanging out with a hot roomie in his boxers first thing in the morning. You're kidding yourselves!"

Hell, my wife could hang out with George Clooney and I would be cool with it, that's why I married her, she's got integrity and good character. I learned along time ago that there's no point in getting upset about things beyond my control, and if you've chosen a partner you don't trust it's kind of down to you as well.

Incidentally my wife's best friend is coming to lodge with us for a few months, whilst she moves house. She's very attractive and in great shape. Maybe I should forbid her to stay with us in case I get tempted, or see her in her underwear. Or maybe I should just count my blessings that I've got a wife who treats me with the same level of respect and trust that I do with her.

"In other words, you've already decided that the burden of proof lies with him. He needs to prove that he's not up to no good".

Right now, I think the burden is actually on both of them. They haven't known each other long enough to offer unconditional trust (like the lucky poster above). But he's the one deciding to do something that may or may not be appropriate, so yes, I think he can use this to show her that he is trustworthy.

I don't believe trust is something you just give someone because you're in a relationship. It has to be earned over time, through observation.

Even then, though, I have a lot of friends, particularly women, who did not "choose" someone they didn't trust, but who found out much too late - like 20 years, in some cases - that their guy, who they always believed in, was actually capable of cheating.

I know, I know...they should've seen the "warning signs". Those big blaring sign posts that would've told them he'd eventually screw his secretary...but, unfortunately, they didn't.

I guess that's why I don't blame a woman who is in a relatively new relationship for questioning things. This is the time to have questions! This is the time to observe, very closely, his character and behavior. We should applaud that as a healthy impulse, not call her names.

All I am saying is: when did distrust become such a dirty word?

This is a good point, lovlysoul: In fact, that is the true "warning sign". A controlling, manipulative person will turn things around on her and make it about HER issues. Then, she'll feel guilty for even questioning him....and back down.

My only complaint is that we've already done that for him.

lovlysoul, now you've gone from just contrary to being deliberately obtuse. You've misquoted the LW and ignored sections of the letter that don't support your pre-conceived notion. Let's go over this again, shall we?

You: Yet, this LW says to us, "Isn't it kind of off that my boyfriend doesn't want a male roomate, but insists on taking a female roomate much younger than me? Is that possibly a sign I should worry about?" And she's immediately attacked."

Me: Here's what the LW actually said: "He needs a roommate to help pay bills, and only a woman has responded." The LW acknowledges that the BF has advertised for roommates and gotten no responses from males. He didn't deliberately seek out a female roommate -- the LW acknowledges that.

You: "That is exactly why women get hurt. They find no support for their suspicions or allegations. "

Me: Well, let's see if there might be a reason for that in this case, hmm. Again, a direct quote from the LW: "but he won't wait to see if others respond (he did once before and ended up stuck)." So he's already bent to her insecurities once -- and guess what: he took in the shorts financially! How far does he need to be driven towards the poorhouse in order to "prove" his love to the LW?

You: "I've had experience with a very manipulative partner. And anytime my instinct told me he was lying, not only would he deny it, but a lot of my friends were singing exactly the same chorus: "You have no PROOF. It's just your 'insecurity'. You should trust him!"

Me: Again, quoting from the letter: "What if we have a fight and he doesn't answer the phone? What if he drinks beers and watches movies with her?" So who do you think is the one who needs "proof" here? Is he obligated to always answer the phone and be sweet to her, even though she called him a cheatin' lyin' sonofabitch and hung up on him just 30 seconds ago? Does he not have the right to put on a movie and drink a beer in peace and get himself calmed down for a bit, to make sure he doesn't say something he'll regret later? If not, then it really doesn't matter if he has a roommate or not, does it now?

You: "That is exactly why women get hurt. They find no support for their suspicions or allegations. Abused women married to guys who look "nice" aren't believed. He looks "too nice". There are "no signs". You have "no reason" not to trust him. Well, often there ARE no "signs" or "reasons" - it's just instinct! "

Me: You keep saying you advocate equality, but this isn't equality, it's gender feminism. You seem to think that being a woman entitles you to be judge, jury, and executioner, based on nothing but your "instinct" (which, by your own admission, has been wrong in the past). If the roles were reversed, you'd be screaming to high heaven about what a chauvanist pig the BF is.

I don't get the Lacy Peterson (may she rest) comparison. It's comparing apples to oranges.

Case A: A woman's husband may be capable of killing her and their unborn child.

Case B: A guy may be capable of screwing his roomate and sabatoging their relationship.

Now, I could probably live with Case B (albeit with the help of some Sex and the City marathons, crying, burning of gifts he gave me, more crying, renaming him in my phone as 'dickwad,' more crying, reevaluating my life and/or the possibility of dying alone, and yet more crying). But, knowing myself, it's pretty safe to say I'd be fine--and, in the grand scheme of things, breakups are NOT A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH--especially when you don't live together and have kids. People don't like to acknowledge the fact that their relationship could crash and burn and that their partner could hurt them (and they have very little control over it). They like to think that, if they are vigilant enough about potential temptations, they can ward off all threats.

Case A, however--I think it's safe to say I literally could not "live" with it. Ladies, if it's about your personal safety, by all means, follow those instincts and run or get the police involved. But if it's something that that police would think you're crazy to call them for (Officer, my BF has a 22-year-old college roommate, and I suspect he's seen her in a towel), then deal with it or break up.

sofar, you nailed it... the way lovlysoul has framed the problem, no solution is possible. You can't prove that anyone can be trusted in all possible circumstances; therefore, no one should ever be trusted. That's not a useful path to go down.

I'm not in total disagreement with lovlysoul, and Cousin Dave's done a good job of illustrating the holes in her argument, so I won't go over the same ground. I also weighed in earlier on the LWs actual issue. But I have to argue this:

"That is exactly why women get hurt. They find no support for their suspicions or allegations. Abused women married to guys who look "nice" aren't believed. He looks "too nice". There are "no signs". You have "no reason" not to trust him. Well, often there ARE no "signs" or "reasons" - it's just instinct! "

I don't think this is true in most cases. I think you'll find that women who do claim to have been abused by their husbands are almost always believed regardless of what their husbands look or seem like to everyone else. I think most women pick up hints pretty early that something isn't quite right, but they rationalize it away: he just had a bad day; he's like that because he loves me; he's just protective; I made him angry; he says it won't happen again; he says he's sorry; I can change him. Sometimes they just don't want to know. Some of them just don't want to admit that the perfect marriage they envisioned (or the perfect wedding, which isn't at all the same thing) just might not be all that perfect. They'll deny the evidence of their own eyes and ears, their gut feelings, his behaviours, and even the warnings of others. As someone who has responded to a heap of such women offering belief, support, a place to stay, legal assistance, etc I can't count the number of times I've been met with such arguments from the victim.

There are of course certain guys, who tend to score pretty high on the psychopathy scale, who are adept at appearing normal, and hiding those warning signs, at least up to a certain point. I suspect that Scott Peterson may fall into this category. As for Drew: hadn't he already had two marriages that ended with the death of his spouse? He couldn't have been more obvious if he'd had "serial wife-killer" tattooed onto his forehead.

I don't want to belabor the Lacey Petersen comment either. Obviously, this is not the same thing. I was just pointing out that based on the limited proof she had not to trust him beforehand, she might've been given similar advice.

Many here seem to feel this is an either/or situation. Either you trust your boyfriend or you don't. Stay or go.

I submit that there is usually a middle ground in most relationships. And I'm not sure it's a good thing to completely trust your partner 100%.

Personally, I kind of like it when I'm out on a girl's night and my guy calls sounding a little worried. Not obsessive, or accusatory...just showing that he realizes there are temptations out there, and though he basically trusts me, he also knows I'm human and could make a mistake, like all humans do. To me, that slight bit of doubt and concern shows he doesn't take our relationship for granted.

Likewise, I trust him to go out with his buddies, even to strip clubs, or long golf weekends. Yet, do I feel entirely comfortable imagining he's getting some hot lap dance? Not really, but it's ok every once in a while.

What the LW is saying is that she doesn't want to deal with that apprehension ALL the time. Maybe she is just deeply insecure (or insane or controlling), or maybe, right now, she is visualizing some hot, model-type serving him breakfast in her nightie, rather than the real, ordinary person this roomie is likely to be.

This truly isn't a gender thing for me. I'd be just as sympathetic to a guy. I think what she is experiencing is a fairly universal feeling, except for those who are lucky enough to master unconditional trust with their partners.

But, frankly, I wouldn't want that. To me, there's a fine line between unconditional trust and complacency. A little doubt and concern is healthy for a relationship.

I mean, I could have a slob of a boyfriend, who lets himself go, and only wants to lie on the couch, watch TV, and drink beer all day. Do I completely trust him? Sure. Who's he going to cheat on me with - the pizza delivery girl? But is that a GOOD thing?

Some might argue that complacency can even lead to infidelity. The partner may think, "You don't even CARE enough to be worried I might cheat on you!"

So, it's kind of a tough balance to strike, and we're all making assumptions based on our own experiences.

I can't say if she'll turn into a domineering shrew, any more than I know if he'll screw the roomate. Both of those are huge leaps to make.

But I do relate to her feelings right now. Bottom line, if the roomate is a gorgeous 20 yr old (as she's imagining), it would be hard to take day-to-day without a very high level of trust. If that turns out to be the case, she'll have to evaluate what she can handle, and set her boundaries. She may say to him, "I just can't deal with this."

And if the roomate is more important to him than his relationship with her, she'll know he is the wrong guy for her anyway.

lovlysoul, I think your last post makes your opinion a lot clearer. I guess only the place where we disagree is that I see the LW as having 2 options.
1) Deal.
2) Break up.

You see a third option
3) Communicate the fact that you are uncomfortable with the situation and explain why. Possibly compromise by meeting the potential roomie and making a decision based on how comfortable you feel after that (at least that's how I understand it).

The only reason I don't see this as an option is the bitterness this could cause. Many adults don't appreciate having their behavior/decisions limited by another. Say he does decide to wait for a male roomie and one does not materialize. By then the potential female roomie may no longer be interested and he's financially stuck--and bitter that, because he tried to compromise with his GF's issues, he's in a bad financial situation. I doubt he's going to be saying, "Wow honey. I'm so glad you recognized the potentially tempting situation I could have been in. I wasn't even thinking about how my inability to control my lust would have prevented me from acting like a sane adult. I'm so glad I have you to be vigilant about any threats to our relationship and remind me that my decisions may not always be the best for me."

I agree, it's not fair that the LW should have to put her feelings aside and deal with a situation she's uncomfortable with. But, although she can't help how she feels, she can help how she acts. And the load her feelings place on the relationship wouldn't get any lighter if she passes it on to her BF to deal with.

I'm glad you see what I mean, Sofar.

But, you know, they have even bigger problems if he would react in a childish, punitive way over just losing a roomate. Plus, what you say about her should equally apply to him: You can't help how you feel but you can help how you act.

Why should she be the one to swallow her discomfort and resentment while he is allowed to feel "controlled" and bitter? Should we really suggest she accept a situation that makes her uncomfortable so he won't be mad at her?

We all resent having to make adjustments for our loved ones at times, but the reality is that we must. Like it or not, when you're in a relationship, what you do effects the other person.

There are likely much greater sacrifices ahead than losing a roomate, so if they can't negotiate a compromise on this, it doesn't bode well for their future.

Still, I think when she meets the roomate, her fears will probably be resolved. The fact is, the attractiveness of the roomate matters here. If she's not a Gisele Bundchen look-alike, this is probably NOT going to be an issue between them.

However, if she is, I myself would be hesitant and a little suspicious of his motives. In all honesty, that wouldn't be comfortable for me either, and I would hope my boyfriend was sensitive enough to understand why.

Because if it was my boyfriend, I wouldn't do that to him. I wouldn't put myself in a living situation with some hot-looking guy, which might cause him concern or anxiety. I try to avoid the appearance of inpropriety because I'm sensitive to his feelings, and I expect the same.

That's just what is called for in a respectful, mature relationship. It shouldn't cause resentment. If you care about keeping things peaceful and good, you shouldn't "borrow trouble", as my grandma would say. Insisting on a roomate that would cause your partner discomfort is just creating unnecessary drama. Why ask for drama when you can avoid it?

test

I find it hard to believe that only one person responded to the roommate wanted ad. Add to the fact that the only place he posted was a college board gives me a gut feeling that he wants a young hottie in his life and the LW is right to be concerned.

Why didn't this man advertise in the local newspaper? Going to a college campus means one thing for a guy in his 30's. The Girlfriend needs to get over her 'love' and get rid of this guy ASAP before she gets emotionally hurt. Imagine the uproar if the GIRLFRIEND needed a roomie and got a hot stud from the college campus. Everyone would be screaming how that poor boyfriend should get rid of that 'slut' and how she dissed him for daring to have another guy live in her house.

Quizzical ~~ Just got internet access after a long drought and have been reading this thread with great interest.

I think somebody by now should have commented on your great rewrite of Lolly's satire. You did invent a truly ridiculous scenario which no one would ever take seriously. Nobody could ever live like that, or even think like that -- could they? COULD THEY???

JoJo - I couldn't believe that he only found this one female either. Hmm, are we sure he even posted an announcement?

Anyway, I would suggest that LW reserve judgment, let BF do whatever he wants; don't borrow trouble. Then when/if female roommate moves in, LW should be the first one at BF's apartment to greet the new roomie, become a great pal. Pre-emptive strike.

That's what lots of French women do if they think you're even vaguely flirting with their husband (or vice versa).

Anyway, LW will want to be on good terms with new roomie -- even if she turns out to be a hag.

I think it's an insult to her boyfriend, whom she pretty much has said she doesn't trust.

Whose to say of if a guy roommate moves in the BF and the roomie might not get it on? We don't know peoples underlying proclivities. Not as feasable but not impossible.

So with that said I think the BF should dump this controlling awful girl.

I find the whole thing confusing. He needs a roommate but she has no interest in living with him and hates the idea of him being around her place 24/7? But she thinks she has the right to tell him who he can have pay half his rent? I don't think so.

She's not ready to live together, I completely understand that, but exactly how long have they been together because if a guy I hadn't even said "I love you" to tried to tell me he had veto rights on my housemates I'd tell him to go fuck himself because he wouldn't be fucking me in the forseeable future. If we had done the 'I love you's" and he pulled that on me I'd probably drop his ass for even assuming that 'the attraction could be too great'.

Sounds like she's possessive but has no interest in being mutually possessed. He can't have a sock drawer in her place but she can tell him who stays in his?

I'm mostly confused because HE didn't write you Amy...

One girl, one boy, alone...

Of course fantasies are going to happen, if he has this young hot college girl in there with him, alone. This isn't a situation of a group of people living together... this is one boy, and one girl. Fantasies are 100% guaranteed to happen. And actual sex is likely, though not 100% sure. Not because he's a bad person. But because attraction often naturally happens among roommates.

People are human, and attractions arise. Best to avoid situations where they are likely to.

Ok. Boyfriend listens to Girlfriend and gets a male roommate. Male roommate is a stud. Male roommate is gay. Male roomate walks around wearing only his boxer shorts. Boyfriend sees his manly pecs. Boyfriend gets "curious". Boyfriend has a new "boyfriend".
:P