Yeah, hon -- I actually kinda got that. Your entry would seem to suggest you would consider what she did on the icky side. Whereas for her, apparently it was some kind of turnon.

I say it shouldn't really come as a surprise to anyone, as -- honestly, I only know about this -- well, there's a whole little fetishist sub-culture of guys who pay for underwear some chick has worn. And you know what? God bless 'em, I say.

Why not? As long as nobody's getting hurt, everybody should do what tickles their fancy.

I expound upon all this because Christy also said: "...you didn't say either way..."

Which I, after some consideration, have decided to mean that I didn't say what my opinion was -- as in, "ick" or "hot".

Well. Hm. I don't know.

I guess the thing is, for it to be a Good Thing, I'd imagine a key factor would be that the girl definitely thinks it is. I mean, that obviously wouldn't guarantee the guy would be into it too, but it's not a bad place to start.

So -- yeah, I'm not really sure if I'd think "ick" or "hot". You know, over the course of all the various entanglements I've been in, there have of course been things that others did that I probably disliked more than I liked -- and, it's when the overall dislike starts to outweigh the overall liking, I'd say it's time to stop going there.

Actually, to my mind, we should want an even better pleasure-to-displeasure ratio. Something like -- say, 3-5% displeasure is acceptable. But anything even approaching 10% is really pushing it.

If I'm making any sense whatsoever at this point -- overall: while I'd certainly feel it might be stretching it to call what she did "classy", if her goal was to stop the chit chat and get to the sexing as quickly and efficiently as possible, she really couldn't get any more direct without just saying, "Fuck me. Now."

Which, as far as it goes, I'm sure would be pretty effective in its own right. But yet again, I'd think mostly only so with someone you're already certain wants you.

And of course, I understand that some people (probably including Christy) probably wouldn't do that, even if they knew the other person wanted them.

Takes all kinds, to make the world go 'round, folks. And it's a good thing, because while we do for the most part tend to be attracted to what is familiar (and therefore typically similar) to us, there does seem and innate desire for some difference.

For anyone who hasn't encountered it yet: If you ever start dating someone who really is exactly like you -- I mean, from mood to music to clothes to food to family to media, education, goals -- like, literally as if someone said, "Let's build an "opposite-sex" copy of _________."

Any who've been there can testify to this -- unless one of the things the two of you have in common is homicidal codependency issues, you'll be running away from each other within two weeks. Guaranteed.

We want something very similar to ourselves -- but I think everybody likes being a little surprised, sometimes.