You know, this story bothered me, but I'm not completely sure why. I'll try: It has a sort of uncomfortable breeziness about it, like we're getting the gloss-over on some very important things. Up comes the sexuality issue, but the thread is lost. The brief "red flag" scenes with the cigarette smoke, the eating disorder, the liquor...finally the addiction thread is pressed into service to create a pat conclusion, the echo we've been expecting, and it all feels rather calculated and fluffy--insight lite.

I guess this may be Ms. Bauer's usual tone; I'm not sure, but I have to say I was looking forward to a more searching, thoughtful treatment of this intense relationship, with more detailed, honest examination and a closer microscope on important moments and scenes. Sorry to be a jerk, but there's a lack of depth and introspection in this essay (and in the author's tendency to fall blindly into helpless, craptastic scenarios, maybe). This is a (potentially) incredibly interesting story and I really wanted to get more out of it.

I'm touched and impressed by your ability to write with such feeling without being mawkish, thank you for your trust in us (the readers).

And a familiar story, but not one I've seen expressed with such simple eloquence before, without a hint of judgement. A refreshing change from Salon's usual fair.

All the best for the future.

You know, this story bothered me, but I'm not completely sure why. I'll try: It has a sort of uncomfortable breeziness about it, like we're getting the gloss-over on some very important things.

The exact same reason is why I really liked this essay. It doesn't try to get overly confessional and doesn't lapse into belabored self-examination.

And the very breeziness of her style is what makes it so cutting. She writes about her own seduction and downfall as cleanly, sharply, and smoothly as a stiletto in the ribs. Uncomfortable indeed!

To me, the fact that she can involve her readers in that feeling is what makes it good writing.

Dear Ms. Bauer:

The title of this piece should have been, “I am a Straight Person and Attracted to Losers.”

In the future, please both you and Salon, leave gay and lesbian people out of your own narcissistic fantasies about your deep-seated problems. Thanks for helping lesbian and gay people shed the unfair perceptions of transitory indecency and instability in your very public exploration of self.

Thank you. You are the best. Hopefully you only set us back a decade.

It does seem like sexuality is the side issue here, and the writer doesn't even realize it.

Co-dependents have to at some point deal with the REAL stuff: Why (and how)do they wind up enmeshed with addicted and disordered people over and over again -- and how can they stop the cycle?

It's something every mom should take pretty seriously before she brings a string of temporary people into her kids' lives and breaks their little hearts over and over, too.

I think kliztexas nailed it - the lesbian issue is sort of a straw man. This is about a person making poor choices. So why is the lesbian issue if prominently featured....Sigh, it's just so 1990s.

I suppose in the 60s this would have been a..."I dated a black man, then he kissed me and I wasn't attracted! How could that be? I'm open minded! But hey, I realized Iike blonds. And then I discovered he had all of these horrid qualities that no stable individual would be involved in, and I realized I had to let him go. Guess I'm done dabbling with black people" sort of a story.

Perhaps the writer does realize that there are many things that make a person attractive-sense of humor, feelings of security, lure of danger, desire to right wrongs from past relationship, sexual compatibility, etc. And when we think we're making better choices, we find ourselves sucked right back into our own foibles. But by highlighting the gender/sexuality aspect-the titillating *ooh lesbianism!* angle, it just feels....well, tired. And the some of my best friends are happy lesbians cliche? Eeeeek.

In the end I suppose what left a bad taste in my mouth is that while Ms. Bauer claims the situation was "complicated", Gisele never seems anything more than a simple, one dimensional caricature, a cheap prop to forward the her, the protagonist- development.

My take is that she found someone attractive, was unable to be physically intimate, and it turns out that despite the gender issue, she really has a problem with being attracted to alcoholic personalities--the giveaway was on the 1st page..."Gisele drank brandy and played games with the kids while I cleaned up," which told me pretty much which way the article was headed. I don't think this article will set back the gay rights movement in any way. Your mileage may vary.

Yeah, the lesbian angle hooks you in, but the story's got nothing to do with lesbianism. No need to get offended.

The author knows it's got nothing to do with lesbianism. She knows the real point was that she fell right back into a co dependent relationship, even without the sex! She gives that away with saying Gisele had the horns that fit into her holes.

She's soooo co dependent that when she finds the perfect horns she's ready to have a go at it even though it's against her sexual orientation.

Where she went wrong was in not showing us all the clues in hindsight that her "girlfriend" had an addictive personality.

Without that the point of the story is pretty subtle.

I actually liked the detached tone. Much better than a melodramatic tone.

But she did like the woman. She had a girl crush, you know, like they talk about in Broadsheet.

This stor is totally missing a point. What was it? I did think it was cute how she was noticing the drinking G was doing by the end. Maybe the writer is simply frigid to anyone who drinks after her husband? In the end, who cares?