C'mon, people! You can't Google someone on the basis of a photo ... just one of the fatal inconsistencies of this narrative.

Aliens, indeed.

First, she saw the photo. Then, she could have remembered the woman's name from previous discussions with her husband. Don't you think she would have pried it out of him when they were having their prolonged talks about the subject? I sure as hell would have found out the name--but maybe wouldn't have thought of googling until seeing the actual photo.

Can I have the stripper's phone number?

Everyone knows the crazy ones are really good in bed.

That was the first thing that went through my mind...how can you google someone simply on the basis of a photo? If she knew the woman's name, wouldn't it logically follow that she actually, well, *knew* her in some capacity?

I don't know if I think this letter is fake...I have my reason to think it is. I know we are all different, but to think that the writer honestly has such an open relationship, yet believes that she "should" be the one taking the photo of her husband and his mistress, or, excuse me, alien? Is this what is common in their relationship?

Then again...it takes all kinds...

My only hope is that, if it is true, the LW is using condoms with her husband.

I'd like to know what her being a (gasp) stripper has to do with the price of ganja in the desert, actually. Being upset at any cavorting that might have been done without prior discussion of boundaries, fine. Anyone could understand that. But it seems to me that the issue is more about her purported associations with a pro-infidelity group than it is about her profession, at least insofar as it affects the writer and her husband.

No real point here, really, just a little tired of editors extraneously using "STRIPPER!" in the headline. Really tired old sensationalism. "SEX! Now that we've gotten your attention, here's a new hairball-removal product," and the like.

Thanks and props to Cary for not even dignifying that part of the letter - and headline - with a response. He addresssed the relevant parts of her problem instead, fancy that.

There's no way for us ever to be sure whether Cary's letters are ringers. Rather than waste time trying to prove the unprovable, I'd rather discuss the contents of the letter.

I'm a child of the 60s. We thought we invented free love, and that anybody who was exposed to our lifestyle would choose to be as free as we were. Unfortunately, none of the open relationships I've known about survived for any length of time, and today's letter is an example of why that happens. (Of course, many of the non-open relationships broke too, but not with the same deadly predictability as those that were open.)

It seems to be a rarity for both members of a couple to choose the exact same degree of openness. Although the people in all of those relationships agreed on complete honesty and full disclosure, and they started out functioning under those agreements, I never saw any couple sustain total and complete honesty over the long haul. Most open relationships have a rule that if one partner becomes uncomfortable, the other partner will back off the outside relationship. That only seems to work for a short time, if at all.

Most likely all of this fucking around comes from people wanting to have it all: the security of an ongoing committed relationship; the comfort of a good solid friendship; the security of a fuckbuddy when outside interests aren't answering their phones; and the ability to have sex when and with whom one chooses. It's too bad it doesn't work.

I knew one couple who had been open from the beginning. He didn't believe in marriage or commitment, but he liked her and wanted her in his life. He had many sex partners and was very open about it; she had one that I knew of. In fact, on more than one occasion I caught him with his ear to her bedroom door while she was with her only lover. So much for trust. When she decided to become a part of the openness in their open relationship, he was too insecure to live with it.

From what I've seen, it's fairly typical for one of the two partners to renege on the agreement or not to be able to handle complete openness. Not surprisingly, it usually turns out that the one who is the most vocal about free love actually is the more insecure partner.

Best wishes to LW. I hope she has other options because this one seems to have turned to shit.

I think LW is finding out that theoretically an open relationship may sound intriguing to some people, but in actuality, most of those people find they can't deal with the jealousy. And for a good reason, talk about yin and yang, putting up with the negatives of a marriage has to be for a reason, and the main one is that you know that person is always there for you. Not going on secret trips to vegas with his stripper girlfriend.

I think also she's not told us some about how she came to know the stripper. Maybe at burning man they got to know each other and now she's surprised her husband kept in touch? Again, a common reaction to a 3some, is that one spouse makes efforts to see the 3rd wheel on the side, and deception gets started and eventually errodes the marriage.

Sure, it doesn't always happen, but it usually does.

Cary's right. You need the facts. Something has changed and you need to find out how and decide if you want to deal with the change, or change your life accordingly.

So for all the protestations that she was cool about her man and that woman hanging out at Burning Man (still, huh?), the minute she finds out that there might be a continuing relationship the claws come out. She's a stripper -- she believes in aliens -- she can be Googled! Why that Jezebel is nothing but a slut! (And what's with "Anonymous" assuming she has VD?)

I sincerely hope the LW gives us an update somewhere down the road.