Had some mixed experiences using butter as lube, have you?
I'd only seen two of the films on the list, Brokeback Mountain and A History of Violence, which I now know contains the first instance of mainstream onscreen 69.
The inclusion of Out of Sight is spot on.
58 in apo's link warms my heart, Becks. Let's get busy.
The video included seems often not to match the descriptions at all. Eg the description of the Laurel Canyon selection mentions a threesome offhandedly and then dwells on a different scene; the clip they provide, however, is about three seconds of fumbling that might, I suppose, eventually become a threesome. Anyway there are three people.
I pronounce it: a scam.
Emerson: Can vegans use butter lube?
B: Nope. Olive oil.
Olive Oil uses butter oil? Pop-AY, papi.
Her name is spelled "Olive Oyl", Stanley, you rube.
Can't trust those Pop/eye-fan-fic types.
Around here I can only find oily charm, unfortunately.
I use charm.
That'll give you cancer, too.
Of course, so will genital contact give you cancer, maybe, so.
Porn has the good sex scenes. Especially amateur stuff. Even now someone in your neighborhood is probably filming a better sex scene than lame Hollywood has ever done.
I don't know, Sifu. I thought The Order of the Phoenix was weak. Now, HPIII, that's lubricative.
Porn has the good sex scenes.
I don't know. They also excel at the provocative plot twists. So many strengths.
Porn has the good sex scenes.
Possibly the saddest comment ever?
I didn't keep count, but I am sure I have seen at least half the movies, some several times. I spend a lot of time on IFC, just last night watched 2 hours on "Indie Sex", one on un-simulated sex, one on teen sex. They had an interview with Catherine Breillat. I have never found the time to explore the website.
One classic they missed was All the Right Moves an early movie with Tom Cruise & Lea Thompson. Thompson finally gives up her virginity with a mutual slow strip that is sweet & erotic. But if you frame advance thru the scene you can see the actors can't stand each other, and as Cruise takes off his briefs, Thompson looks down and up at his face, and gives Cruise a very obvious sneer.
I'll never believe Cruise is straight.
What? Yours was way funnier. It's not pwning if you make a different joke.
It was essentially the same joke. Also, don't patronize me.
Fine, B. Like so many others, Heebie will take her custom elsewhere.
I'm not sure those make it all the way to jokes, more expressions of prissiness.
Also, don't patronize me.
There, there, shhhh. I wasn't doing anything of the sort. You're so funny.
B is a girl after all. Humor her.
28 gets it wrong.
I don't like watching erotic sex scenes in movies because it turns off whatever intelligent parts of my brain were enjoying the movie. But I can appreciate which ones are truly erotic.
I'm surprised there wasn't a mention of "Cruel Intentions". One of the scenes in that was by far the most erotic thing in the world, to the mind of my ex-girlfriend. The scene with Counting Crows' "Colorblind" playing over it.
Without sex scenes and toilet jokes, movies are a waste of time. Mostly just relationship shit.
Easily the best blowjob in film history.
Sex scenes and toilet jokes *are* relationship shit.
The scene with Counting Crows playing
You just gave me ED.
Toilet jokes? Nah.
And I'm talking about soulless, objectifying sex scenes, not the relationship kind.
I don't actually, know, of course.
Finally Mullholland Drive gets some kind of recognition. Unfortunately, I found the scene in question kind of a weak spot in the movie, as it was straight guy les-porny, rather than actual lesbian porny, as would befit the plot.
I saw Mullholland Drive in the theater. There was this guy talking the entire movie and no matter how many times people in the audience asked him to be quiet, he wouldn't shut up. In fact, he would shout at them "I'm here for the hot lesbian sex! Leave me alone!" Finally, far far into the movie, he got up, threw down his popcorn and announced to the theater that even hot lesbo sex wasn't enough to get him to sit through even another minute of this crap of a movie. He created a big scene, very disruptive, etc. Less than five minutes after he left, the big lesbian sex scene he'd been waiting for came on. The entire audience burst out laughing at the timing.
The list is mostly boring and predictable. For instance, having just watched Paz Vega's Lucia y la Sexo, what I remember as most erotic was the early restaurant scene, where this beautiful stranger just gives herself to the writer.
And the completely missed Secretary, focusing on the gentle near-finale. Maggie G did a fantastic job at communicating the erotic pleasure of true SM to those of us not into it, and if you aren't turned on by the dumpster-diving and spanking, you have rejected the movie.
The movie challenges you at the very beginning. The weird bondage contraption, the elegance and beauty of Gyllenhal, the contentment in her face...it is difficult to either accept or reject.
Is there no 9 1/2 Weeks here? I'm very troubled by that film, but I thought it was a standard for most people on any such list.
Secretary is the 9 1/2 weeks of the new century, and a much better movie. The book 9 1/2 weeks was superior to the movie, with no Mickey Rourke to deal with.
51: I saw MD at the theatre too, in more auspicious circumstances. I had a big argument with the friend with whom I saw it over whether there was more to it than Lynch wanking. Repeat viewings lend support to my side, but, asshole that he is, my friend pretends to be unconvinced. He cites the guy-centric nature of the sex as a point in his favor. Naomi Watts being Naomi Watts, I disagree,but cannot complain.
I've hardly seen any of the movies on that list. 7 out of the 50, I think.
I have seen Mulholland Drive (with a hot Hungarian exchange student, no less). I liked it, but I agree about the straight-guy-fantasy aspect of the lesbian sex detracting from it.
I saw Cruel Intentions in a motel room in Utah. With my parents. Ah, memories.
I thought the sex was a lot hotter in (the first 2/3 or so of) 9 1/2 Weeks. Secretary was very good at showing the healing power of teh BDSM, but it wasn't a great movie about fucking.
53:Sorry, that's Adrian Lyne I think, and terrible fashionista bullshit. Lyne has three movies on that list, and I think he seriously sucks.
Bound was a good movie with a good sex scene, but I thought the role reversal was obvious and trite, and not supported by the rest of the movie.
57: No you don't, you big liar. Those chicks are hot. It's not the fact of their getting it on that I'm objecting to, it's the style.
Ah. I love Lyne all over.
I found Secretary annoyingly didactic and silly, though there were some kinda hot scenes in it. It just seemed overpoliticized, like a school project. Lyne's film is a lot messier and meaner, and actually a lot more true to my (albeit limited) experience of the BDSM affair.
Actual hott sexx is unfilmable, in that were it filmed, it would look pretty stupid.
Anyway, AWB, you might want to check out the book if you haven't yet. It's more raw and honest than the movie. About all dimensions, from the hot to the troubling ones.
Is Y Tu Mama Tambien on the list? I thought it was one of the few truly convincing and successful mainstream movies about sex. Some of the only scenes that somehow got around the problem that actors in "sex scenes" don't, you know, have sex.
Again, 63, I feel compelled to refer you to the 3% of porn that is actually good. Either that or a strategically placed mirror. It doesn't look stupid. Let the vilification resume.
Embarassingly, I haven't actually seen Secretary. Just had it recommended a lot, and figured it had to be better than the annoyingly music-videoish 9 1/2 weeks .
It's not the fact of their getting it on that I'm objecting to, it's the style.
Yeah, that's what I mean.
I dunno. I think the main difference between 9.5W and Secretary is that one seems to show that sex itself does not construct a sufficient ethos or world-view, while the latter argues that sex itself can be sufficient for solving all problems. IME, people who tend to fixate too much on the power of sex are often denying themselves professional psychiatric help of other kinds. Sex can help people play out their anxieties and limitations in cool and fun ways, but treating it like a possible Answer is dangerous.
Some of the only scenes that somehow got around the problem that actors in "sex scenes" don't, you know, have sex.
Sometimes they do.
Sex can help people play out their anxieties and limitations in cool and fun ways, but it's important not to exploit the power of the transference situation unethically.
64:Of course, YTMT is on the list.
I thought YTMT was decent enough for a chick fantasy. :)
That is, relying on a sex partner to provide you with comfort, drama, fun, safety, and pleasure? Neat! Relying on a sex partner to be responsible for keeping you from harming yourself or others? That's a situation I've been forced into, and it blows. So maybe it's just my personal beef with Secretary "happily ever after" crap.
I had the same problem with Punch-Drunk Love. All I could see was a psychotically violent person who, five minutes after the end of the film, was going to cut his new kinky girlfriend's face off the first time he suspected her of looking at someone else.
people who tend to fixate too much on the power of sex are often denying themselves professional psychiatric help of other kinds.
Ha! Too true! Another thing I'd say is that such people are sometimes searching for a way to simulate the intensity of love while maintaining a safer emotional distance. BDSM in particular does echo a few of the ways love makes us vulnerable, or powerful. But in love roles are fluid and always changing.
I would argue that most of the sex that seems really hot in movies is not sex I would actually want to have.
70:Nah, it is not just you, AWB. The question as to whether the character in Secretary needs love or therapy is pretty upfront in the movie. I might contend that the last third, as Spader starts running away and Maggie takes charge of her life, answers the question in a way, down to the final cockroach on the bed.
She takes charge of her life by sitting in a wedding dress in his office until he comes for her? I guess her internal transformation didn't ring very true to me. She still required him to show up and take care of her. Is she a truly independent, self-actualized person, or is she just being a bossy bottom?
Abnd Secretary isn't really about BDSM as therapy. This isn't a game, or a passing phase, or a weekend thrill for this couple. They aren't playing or pretending.
You did notice that Spader gave up his macho yuppie house for a rustic cottage in a real neighborhood. Who's in charge here?
Maybe I related to the movie in a different way, seeing it as about how people can manage and enjoy their pathologies while functioning and maintaining identity.
people can manage and enjoy their pathologies while functioning and maintaining identity
This is, I agree, important. I have very close friends for whom this is a daily reality, and I saw them in that movie, to some degree. That level of interdependence can be freeing for some people. I'm just not sure it's always the same thing as intimacy, though the fantasy most interdependent people have is that it is nothing but intimacy.
". Is she a truly independent, self-actualized person, or is she just being a bossy bottom?"
Pretty judgemental, in your way, aren't you?
Was sitting in the chair a test, or did Spader expect, snd maybe even hope, that she wouldn't be there when he came back? After all, he fired her. Yeah, Maggie is in control in the last third. You just find her tools unappealing, which is your problem, not hers.
The list should have included the scene from Lone Star, somewhere.
Oh, I just meant that her character was damn lucky that she had a dom who would respond to her needs to that degree. Maybe I just had very bad luck, or poor judgment, when I used to go out with superdommy guys. On the very rare occasions when I expressed a need, it was always used against me, and taught me that only the most superb tightrope-walking bottoms can maneuver that well without coming off as bossy.
Well, it was a romantic fantasy or comedy, after all, not an exercise in psychological naturalism. 9 1/2 Weeks may be more accurate, but is not nearly as much fun.
I don't like Lyne's MTV slickness.
Relying on a sex partner to be responsible for keeping you from harming yourself or others?
This from the woman who insists that good sex is dangerous.
One would expect the reason that real-life BDSM communities have the strict etiquette they do is precisely because of situations like 79. But of course Secretary is a fantasy, not a documentary. In real life, the title character of Amelie would be a creepy stalker worthy of a restraining order.
(Not that I'm especially fond of it. Don't care for either Gyllenhaal or Spader.)
That list has some good choices and a lot of boring ones. Also Monster's Ball and Pillow Book are not on it, so it's officially bullshit.
Sure. And I'd certainly have felt more comfortable dating a guy who thought Secretary was relentlessly hot than a guy who used 9 1/2 Weeks as a sexual bible.
good sex is dangerous
I said this? How long ago? I think I'm becoming more vanilla by the minute these days.
There was some recent discussion involving the term "pabulum" and what did or didn't qualify, but I can't remember which thread.
At 63: FM: Actual hott sexx is unfilmable, in that were it filmed, it would look pretty stupid.
At 72: AWB: I would argue that most of the sex that seems really hot in movies is not sex I would actually want to have.
Actual sex: somewhere in between these two comments.
I find all sex on screen creeps me out. Maybe I am just old and disgusting or married or something. But when I see something powerfully erotic, like Dan Day Lewis and Juliet Binoche in "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" I just feel an immense sadness at not being able to fool myself the world is like that any more or a fierce discontent with my actual erotic opportunities.
Other stuff is just pornographic -- ie a stimulus to wanking. Not that this is a very terrible way to pass the time, but it does interfere with any other form of enjoyment of the film, and in a cinema people might object.
Then there is the plain embarrassing. Who wants to watch that?
Sigh. David Lynch has only made two movies: Dune and the other one.
So Pillow Book isn't on the list? What about The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover? I'll have to look through this all after work. And what about Les Voleurs? If that's not on there, it's total bullshit.
Also, what about the "Supercallifragilisticexpialidocious" number from Mary Poppins?*
*Note: Some resistant reading may be required.
Did the opening scene of Betty Blue make the list?
Poor Will's genitals.
Hey!!! Not funny!! Cancer is not even in the top ten bad reasons to have sex with me.
No Cook, and no Les Voleurs, and not even the furtive clothed sex scene in the barracks from Enemy at the Gates*. But they do have the puppet sex scene from Team America and they do have History of Violence, so that's something.
(* Perhaps an unorthodox choice.)
and not even the furtive clothed sex scene in the barracks from Enemy at the Gates*
*The most awkward sex scene of all time! It's not the furtive clothedness, that's cool, you get it where you can, but just that Rachel Weisz (I think) looks like she's in pain the entire time.
It's precisely the awkwardness that makes it so hot. Also Weisz' facial expression, not pain exactly but certainly intense.
I can't believe that none of those seekrit durty Disney™-movie moments didn't make the list.
"didn't make the list" s/b "made the list"
Gah. Where's the coffee?!
Then there is the plain embarrassing. Who wants to watch that?
Which is why most people choose to have sex in private. Movie sex is surely as choreographed as any Bollywood dance sequence.
What about The Cook, the Thief, His Wife and Her Lover?
I think it's supposed to be the hottest sex scenes, not the most horrifying sex scenes. Last Tango in Paris isn't there either.
I agree with 88. Except it doesn't make me sad, it just always distracts me from whatever else the movie is about.
I said this? How long ago? I think I'm becoming more vanilla by the minute these days.
You said exactly that. 11 days ago.
Sex cleansed of any hint of the darker side of sex (dominance / submission dynamics, for instance, cf. complaining about Star Wars as an instance of using "rape" for titillation") is pabulum.
Agreed. But this also means that all good sex is probably emotionally and physically somewhat dangerous, or maintaining the appearance of danger or abuse, on some continuum. Which is why a lot of people opt out of it entirely, a la Twisty.
Good find. I think I was trying to make the argument one way, but not the other. I don't, for example, think all emotionally or physically dangerous sex is good. And there are also a lot of ways to achieve a sense of "danger," and emotional danger, especially, works in different ways for different people. Intimacy itself is scary enough.
OTOH, I think only physically dangerous sex is good. The only really good sex is had while skydiving.
Or having sex while raising your bad-cholesterol, and letting your blood glucose levels spike. Living on the edge!
Divorce tip:
If you are cheating on your wife and you have a bad heart, you better hope that your heart attack is fatal.
"Is it not true that the ambulance picked you up from your co-worker's house at 12:30 pm?"
So, if one has recently broken up with one's boyfriend of nine years, and one is already really really missing sex, is it a good idea to watch one (or more) of these movies? If so, which one(s)?
Because, damn. I miss sex. It's only been a month since I moved out, though we'd stopped having sex for a few weeks before the actual move. I thought we were just going through a dry spell. Turns out he was having sex with his new girlfriend. She has already moved into the room I vacated on the first of the month.
Anyhoo, will watching these increase my frustration, or assist in battery-facilitated release? Enquiring minds, ya know.
I predict sobbing release. Go for it!
That truly sounds suck-awful. Good luck & all blessings.
105: Oooh, sympathies. That really does stink.
That sucks mightily, Wrenae. The first few months are the most difficult. I recommend getting off in whatever ways possible until the despair passes.
Oh man, Wrenae. That's rough.
re: 105
Personally, if I was just seeking 'release' I'd go for something more genuinely pornographic than more or less anything on that list. My (female) partner really liked Y Tu Mama Tambien, though.
Commiserations on the break-up, though.
So, sucking and sobbing predicted. Sounds like any other day, but I might give it a try anyway.
Which brings me to my next question: casual sex. If one is monogamously inclined, as I am, does it make sense to try to have casual sex anyway? I don't think I'd be very good at it. But I am frustrated, and not nearly ready for a relationship of any sort.
I've never really considered myself attractive enough to be a playa, but I don't doubt that with enough alcohol, I could find someone in this city who'd have sex with me. Is it worth it, though? At 35, I'm probably too old to reset my meter to include casual sex.
103: Do the Marlon Brando. A gallon and a half of of ice cream, sex, and a trip to the ER!
Thanks for the sympathies, y'all, as well as any advice.
Poor Wrenae.
If one is monogamously inclined, as I am, does it make sense to try to have casual sex anyway? I don't think I'd be very good at it. But I am frustrated, and not nearly ready for a relationship of any sort.
As a monogamously inclined person, I've found that sex isn't enjoyable until I've been with the person for quite a while.
Do be afraid or embarassed to grieve. A long relationship takes time to get over.
You've been inclined for monagomy but you've been with this guy for 9 years!
You were just a child then. Now, as an adult, you can try casual sex.
I think casual sex is a fine way to deal with a breakup. Just be sure it's with someone with whom you wouldn't be tempted to start a relationship. Relationships begun primarily out of horniness are awful. But good, totally depraved sex with a semi-stranger (or, better yet, a friend of a friend) can be very satisfying, enough that you can put off the hunt for a new partner for a while. I'm trying to take my time and not fall into anything serious this time without finding someone I'd be glad to spend some actual time with.
Wrenae, I'll break lurkerhood because I went through a very similar thing not so long ago. I'd suggest that you avoid pursuing one night stands, there is a good risk it will just make you feel horrible. Casual sex though, is a great idea. What you really want is a casual physical relationship with someone who (as AWB notes) you really aren't going to have any risk of entanglement. Best if it is someone you can be really open with about all this stuff immediately.
And really give yourself time. Mine was a 7 year relationship, and I think it took me most of 2 to really get past everything, for what it's worth. The worst thing you can do is let frustration and missing intimacy (of all kinds) push you too quickly into something that isn't right for you.
Oh, and AWB, sounds like you've really got your head on straight about this time round.
After the breakup of the Big Many Years Relationship, I ended up having a 'lover' for the first time ever. We got along really well, we liked each other, but there was no question about it becoming a relationship. (He was a giant playboy.) It was the perfect thing.
That said, things with Lover didn't fall into place until about three months after the actual breakup. Those three months sucked. Watching a movie with a good sex scene (especially if they liked each other!) would have made me weep.
Or, what AWB and anonatwork said.
Okay, so no random one-nighters (phew!) (the very thought made me so nervous!). But maybe a lover. I could do a lover, I think. As long as I didn't fall in love. I have a bad habit of falling in love with people who pay attention to me.
Thanks, everyone.
I have a bad habit of falling in love with people who pay attention to me.
Especially tempting right after the fall. The rebound relationship is a pretty good anesthetic while it lasts, but it's almost always a bad idea that ends poorly. Sorry to hear about teh suckage, wrenae. If you want to meet for drinks some time, drop me an email. Guaranteed not to end in casual sex, though.
Guaranteed not to end in casual sex, though.
Of course not:
I have a bad habit of falling in love with people who pay attention to me.
It takes time to build back self-esteem after a breakup. Intellectually, we know that the breakup of a relationship doesn't mean that we are a bad or unworthy person. Emotionally, that is so much harder to accept.
Awww, Wrenae. I'm so sorry. That blows. No real advice, except that it's never too late to reset your style to 'one-nighter', but there's nothing wrong with not wanting them, either.
Guaranteed not to end in casual sex, though.
But think of the blogging potential! Wait, that's ogged-and-lifeguard-casual-sex I'm thinking of. Nevermind. Thanks for the platonic drink offer, tho.
It takes time to build back self-esteem after a breakup.
This is a problem I've always had. It's how I ended up with a guy who was wrong for me for nine years. That and the fact that the sex was good.
it's never too late to reset your style to 'one-nighter'
I think I'm too serious about sex, even though there's nothing inherently serious about it. I expect it to be a self-esteem & intimacy patch, as well as a physical good time. If I had the other stuff, I would be fine with my vibrator and a porno book of erotica. What I want is not sex, but for someone to think I'm sexy. Which probably isn't healthy.
Also, I should probaby talk to a therapist about that, and not bore you all with self-analysis like this.
What I want is not sex, but for someone to think I'm sexy. Which probably...
is completely natural and universal.
don't beat yourself up about that one--there's nothing necessarily unhealthy about it.
(in fact, it's so natural that it can be explained by life on the veldt!)
What I want is not sex, but for someone to think I'm sexy.
That strikes me as completely normal, actually.
wait.
on seeing apo's endorsement, i'm reconsidering my judgement that it is natural. or normal.
I think it's unhealthy and unnatural for kid bitzer to send me money.
So sorry to hear about it, wrenae. That really, truly sucks.
i'll send it, i'll send it.
you just have to do those unhealthy and unnatural things you were promising in your emails, first.
(i hate getting dunned before i've been done, don't you?)
I recommend watching this video regularly and singing along with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipZDG6__Zfc
124: I'm completely the same way about sex, so I understand. It's just that not changing is a personality thing, not a too old thing.
And wanting to feel sexy is completely normal!
And wanting to feel sexy is completely normal!
says the girl sometimes mistaken for cate blanchett.
By my dad. And only when she played Elizabeth, which means it's the gigantic forehead.
124: Make with the "friends-with-benefits" thing if you can. It's like a one-night stand, but with added self-respect and better sex.
I can't do the friends-with-benefits thing. I've always wondered how that works. If I'm sleeping with someone I'd be friends with, I'd end up dating them. But I'm five months out of a rel relationship, and it's a different stage.
I've never successfully done it myself. My guess is you need a friend who's attractive, and tolerable in small, controlled doses, but where the two of you fundamentally annoy the crap out of each other. So, cordial interaction, sex, and then a mutual desire to flee.
138: That perfectly describes someone I just asked to hang out with me. I don't think I'll sleep with him, but this actual-boyfriend thing could take some time.
Also, I should probaby talk to a therapist about that, and not bore you all with self-analysis like this.
a/k/a "The End of Unfogged."
I had a very brief moment of seeking casual sex between the final bitter end of my marriage and my current girlfriend. There were basically two hookups. In the first, the overwhelming sense was "This is playful and fun" with a tiny sense of "I probably don't want to spend too much time talking to this person". The second was overwhelmingly "This is a waste of time" with a hint of "well, the sex should at least be fun while it's happening". Which it was, but only just so. Listen to yourself, and if most of you is saying "delightful!", go for it. If it's the other way, keep it for yourself and correct it in your perverted imagination.
But the thing about wanting to feel sexy -- that makes all the sense in the world. Doll up and flirt away, it's great medicine. 35-year-old women are the new new black.
136: I can't do the friends-with-benefits thing. I've always wondered how that works.
Someone with whom you have a mutual attraction and decent enough chemistry, but whom you otherwise would see too infrequently to have a real relationship. Maybe you both have crazy lives, whatever.
The temptation will sometimes exist to take it further, of course -- particularly if circumstances change -- and that can be okay too.
138 sounds like the lite no-relationship policy.
Agreed with WS. Even if you're just hanging out with your girlfriends, it's nice to make it an excuse to get very dolled up and go out. It's way too easy to make partners or dates the only occasions when we allow ourselves to feel attractive, as if it's just "for" them. On that note, I'm going to go hose off all this softball blood and sweat (seriously, it was the last and most violent game of the summer) and get pointlessly pretty for my friend's 30th birthday party.
Don't wash off all the blood, AWB. For the sake of the pretty, let a little bit remain.
Wrenae, if you can afford it, this is the time to buy some really hot clothes. And wear them. I got a great suit out of my fuck-you trip to H&M.
If I somehow stopped being in a long-term relationship I might completely change my plans for my education and future.
A lot of what I'm doing now is on the basis of fitting my life together with hers.
Kind of scary to think about it.
138 is pretty much spot-on. It's an unstable equilibrium, though, at least in my experience. But can be fun while it lasts. Not sure it's easy to get into right out of a breakup though.
144: Skinned knees are hot? I never knew. It's a little brutal-looking.
138: It actually sounds like sex bartering, like prostitution except that each partner gets as many utils as they feel is fair, with no need for a cash adjustment.
With a utilometer we could still figure out whose performance was more valuable -- if one partner gave 50 utils while receiving only 20, but was still satisfied, you'd have to assume that the utils they produced were somehow low quality, like 1$ apples as opposed to $2.50 apples. On the other hand, you might just conclude that utils were harder for them to get, as though transportation costs drove up the price of incoming utils, as if their outgoing utils coasted downhill whereas the incoming utils had to climb uphill.
Is there a utilologist in the house?
I thought utils were supposed to be measured in vanilla mousegasms, so there could be no question of variation in quality.
For the Bad Band Name/back of the bike helmet file:
UTILITY SEX MONSTER
"Utility Monster" on its own isn't so bad.
149: Reminds me of this. Not my problem!
Some of that link isn't very funny, but that line is.
That makes the transportation-cost theory more plausible. The 20-util-receiving partner must just be someone in a psychic space where utils are scarce, whereas the 50-util-receiving partner is in a util-rich psychic space.
In a permanent relationship you'd want to find someone in a similiar psychic space so that there'd be no util inequality, but in this kind of relationship you don't have to worry about envy since you don't like each other much anyway.
I still think that if the imbalance were enormous, say 20 utils to 200, the less happy partner might feel cheated.
Truly uncomplicated non-relationship sex is very hard to come by. I've had plenty of things start uncomplicated, but that rarely lasts. Usually the woman wants something more, and was offering sex in the hope that would happen. Which I realize is a cliche, but it's been my experience. That probably just means I'm not part of that minority of men women will sleep with just for the sex alone.
In an ideal world, sex workers would be the solution to the uncomplicated non-relationship sex problem, but as evidenced by epic comment thread wars in the past, we do not live in an ideal world.
155: One of the only useful lasting lessons I got from reading The Unbearable Lightness of Being at 18 was the rule that you can have three dates in quick succession, or only at three-week intervals if you want something to stay casual.
Woman 1: ...and then I made him eat my ass.
Woman 2: Hey, you ever feel weird about that, like if you haven't showered or something?
Woman 1 (shaking head): It's not my problem.
Woman 2: It's not my problem! Ha!
etc.
ASK MY ABOUT MY MOUSEGASMS
That is to say, one who's not worried about getting shorted on utils at crunch time.
158 sounds like the male attitude toward blowjobs. Good for them.
I have the Pauline Kael book featured in that link. It's awesome. Let's play movie critic!
"You can't hit me. I'm a Broadway legend!"