What you REALLY wanted to ask was...

August 18, 2006 8:56 PM

So, at what point does answering the question you feel someone *should* have asked cross the line?
posted by baylink to Etiquette/Policy at 8:56 PM (72 comments total)

Is flagging too slow for you?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:00 PM on August 18, 2006 [1 favorite]

Never, this is metafilter, there are no lines.
posted by voltairemodern at 9:07 PM on August 18, 2006

I didn't want the reply removed; I actually wanted to know... Sometimes, assuming snark isn't ... well, whatever it isn't that won't make me sound like I'm trying to be insulting. :-)
posted by baylink at 9:07 PM on August 18, 2006

Usually unless people are being total assholes it's okay to say "well you might think X but you should also consider Y" within reason of course. MethylViolet sounded a little "nyeah nyeah" in her tone and scarabic sounded a little crotchety in his, and if it ends there in that thread it will be okay with me.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:13 PM on August 18, 2006

That is a good thread. In all the different ways.
posted by peacay at 9:15 PM on August 18, 2006 [1 favorite]

Oh baylink, it would be reasonably impossible to attempt to sketch out all possible scenarios and demarcation lines for answers. If responses are more than vaguely on topic, less than outright abusive, and are contributive then they are probably ok I would think.
posted by peacay at 9:19 PM on August 18, 2006

MethylViolet sounded a little "nyeah nyeah" in her tone and scarabic sounded a little crotchety in his...

I'll bet you they get together before the end of the movie.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:32 PM on August 18, 2006

It's the usual problem with these posts, baylink. It is a valid discussion to have (though I think the sort that defies drawing rational, explainable "lines" and thus will be the source of rich Metatalk content for ages to come) - and you could point out a million examples of the semi-offense of "you want to know the wrong answer, here is the answer to the question you should have asked" (I've done it). But by pointing to a particular example it inevitably feels like you are picking on a particular person. Probably because you're threatened by strong women.

It is a good question though. Obviously "why are you asking what kind of hat you should buy when you should be asking what kind of gun you should buy to put a bullet through that shit-filled skull instead" should be deleted. "I'm a doctor, and you shouldn't be looking for a good tarot reader to deal with that mole that has gotten raised, bumpy, and twice as big in the past 2 weeks, you should be looking for a good oncologist" is probably valid and should stay. Huge grey space in between. A grey space called MetaTalk, where all the grey areas come to blend in. Holy crap, are those cows home already?
posted by nanojath at 9:35 PM on August 18, 2006

meh, I think scarabic protests too much and we should remove that comment.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:48 PM on August 18, 2006

Mathowie, it seems like it would be easy enough to write a script so that every time any comment or post is deleted a Metatalk post was created in the original posters name, you know "why was my post (insert link here) deleted, obviously I thought it should have been included or why else would I have posted it?" That would clear things up. Actually you could probably automate most of the thread as well with some modest statistical analysis (and expert consultation from Quonsar).
posted by nanojath at 9:54 PM on August 18, 2006

nano: I love strong women, and I'm on Methyl's side on this one, actually. And I'm not calling her out; I've liked her stuff this month.

It was just a cigar, really.
posted by baylink at 10:06 PM on August 18, 2006

Dude, I was joking. I got that you weren't against her or her post (it was your statement that you "didn't want the reply removed" that tipped me off), that's my point - it always gets interpreted because of the context or lack thereof.


Wait, were you joking?

Oh my God, what if EVERYBODY is joking and I'm the only one who isn't in on it?
posted by nanojath at 10:25 PM on August 18, 2006

Nope; you trolled me, and I bit, for fair.

:-)
posted by baylink at 11:06 PM on August 18, 2006

Yeah that's just what he'd say if he WAS in on it (mutter mutter) all against me (mutter mutter)... polacks stole the pope (mutter mutter mutter...)
posted by nanojath at 11:13 PM on August 18, 2006

Oh Ma-a-an.
And I just bitched back at Scarabic in the thread. Why didn't someone post that I was meta'd? I could have been all dignified.

I'll bet you they get together before the end of the movie. I love this. And the movie ends with me and Scarabic on a park bench. I open my birthday present to find -- a mesh thong ten sizes too big and a webcam. Reaction shot.
posted by Methylviolet at 12:15 AM on August 19, 2006

Well, since we have a metatalk thread here, I can mention to methylviolet that she needs to remember not all women are offended at lingerie gifts, and that the fact he's asking for suggestions is a very good sign he is a considerate fellow-heaven knows that if my hubby buys me lingerie (which I have no problem with) I WANT him to get help.

Unless it turns out that methylviolet is married to the questioner, and in that case maybe they need to take the discussion offline....
posted by konolia at 6:08 AM on August 19, 2006

Oh my God, what if EVERYBODY is joking and I'm the only one who isn't in on it?

i'd be happy to consult with you on this matter.
posted by quonsar at 7:09 AM on August 19, 2006

I open my birthday present to find -- a mesh thong ten sizes too big and a webcam. Reaction shot.

*takes notes*
posted by cortex at 7:58 AM on August 19, 2006

"a mesh thong ten sizes too big"

That's so it'll fall off.
posted by klangklangston at 9:28 AM on August 19, 2006

"a mesh thong ten sizes too big"

That's because it used to belong to me, but I gave it back to Scarabic after the scene with the donkeys.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 10:22 AM on August 19, 2006

Mathowie, it seems like it would be easy enough to write a script so that every time any comment or post is deleted a Metatalk post was created in the original posters name, you know "why was my post (insert link here) deleted, obviously I thought it should have been included or why else would I have posted it?" That would clear things up. Actually you could probably automate most of the thread as well with some modest statistical analysis (and expert consultation from quonsar).

Yes! This will save untold time and effort! [Note: I lower-cased the q on quonsar because I don't want him comin' after either of us.]
posted by languagehat at 10:48 AM on August 19, 2006

I could have been all dignified.

like you were in your blog post about it?

let's remember the original question for a second: I would like to buy my wife some lingerie for her birthday that will make her feel extra sexy and special. Any recommendations? She is small, fit, and fairly conservative about clothing and fashion.

this is a man who wants to do something nice for his wife, whom he knows and you don't, methyl. that's all. then you had to get all dworkin on his "sleazy" ass.

aside from the insulting non-answer posted in the thread itself, you have this to offer on your blog:

You know that getting someone a present that is really for you is bullshit -- even apart from the utter sleaziness of the implied seduction attempt.

i don't think further editorializing is necessary here, but the word "unhinged" comes to mind.
posted by Hat Maui at 11:18 AM on August 19, 2006

Yeah, but really, I want Methyl to zip me up a mix of the modern hindi stuff that she was talking about, then email it to me. I'm not wild about the super cheesy Hindi pop (which sounds almost exactly like canto-pop to my ears), but would love hip hop derived stuff.
But back to the larger lingerie flamefest...
posted by klangklangston at 11:26 AM on August 19, 2006

that's an utterly sleazy implied seduction attempt right there, klang.
posted by Hat Maui at 11:32 AM on August 19, 2006

The very next sentence -- "I said so there. But here I will say something else on top of and in addition to -- over the top of, maybe, but you can't MeTa me on my own blog." Discerning readers might detect a certain self-mocking tone to the entire post.

But Hat Maui, you must have missed the FAQ.
Stupid people are not allowed to read my blog.
I am sorry that Mrs. Hat Maui is sexually dissatisfied with you, but please don't take it out on me. I recommend porn.
posted by Methylviolet at 11:34 AM on August 19, 2006

posted by klangklangston at 11:52 AM on August 19, 2006

"that's an utterly sleazy implied seduction attempt right there, klang."

Yes, yes it is.
posted by klangklangston at 11:53 AM on August 19, 2006

Methylviolet says: I am sorry that Mrs. Hat Maui is sexually dissatisfied with you, but please don't take it out on me.

Tea. Kettle. Black.

Stupid people are not allowed to read my blog.

She actually went there! Oh wow. So edgy! Can I have your autograph?
posted by purephase at 12:11 PM on August 19, 2006

"Tea. Kettle Black."

?
posted by matthewr at 12:16 PM on August 19, 2006

Curious. Yellow.
posted by Methylviolet at 12:19 PM on August 19, 2006

A poor play on words regarding the tea pot calling the kettle black. Your criticism of Hat Maui could easily be applied to you (and probably more appropriately).
posted by purephase at 12:38 PM on August 19, 2006

There are plenty of questions on AskMe that are open to, and in fact, ask for judgement. The question being talked about here isn't one of them. He asked for recommendations for lingerie. He did not ask whether lingerie would be an appropriate gift for his wife.

Besides Methylviolet was sarcastic and dismissive in her reply.
"How generous" and "if you decide to get her one" are uncalled for.

This has nothing to do with strong women as someone suggested above. It does have to do with answering a question that was not asked, and doing it in an antagonistic way.
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 1:05 PM on August 19, 2006

i'd add something, but i think methyl is making my point for me quite succinctly.
posted by Hat Maui at 1:11 PM on August 19, 2006

If he has to ask a bunch of strangers on the internets what kind of lingerie his wife might like, it's a pretty good sign that he *doesn't* know a) how to shop for lingerie for his wife b) that the "sexy lingerie gift" is frequently a minefield for well-intentioned tone-deaf husbands.
posted by desuetude at 1:39 PM on August 19, 2006

Wait a sec. Was nanojath joking? Was baylink joking? Separately or together? And what does this quonsar character have to do with it? Man I is confused.
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 1:40 PM on August 19, 2006

There's a motto for AskMe:
If you have to ask a bunch of strangers on the internets...

Good thing the poor bastard posted anonymously.
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 2:36 PM on August 19, 2006

MetaFilter: Ask a bunch of strangers on the Internets...
posted by baylink at 2:39 PM on August 19, 2006

yeah, desuetude, he doesn't know how to shop for lingerie for his wife and is looking for recommendations. he's probably making an attempt to avoid the minefield you identify in part b. where's that confounded "obvious" tag when i need it?

your response could be applied to nearly any askme question. asking "strangers on the internets" something doesn't mean you won't get good information, nor is lingerie some special category of question that "strangers on the internets" (paging samuel jackson) are less capable of answering.
posted by Hat Maui at 3:00 PM on August 19, 2006

yeah, desuetude, he doesn't know how to shop for lingerie for his wife and is looking for recommendations.

Right. So why all of the "why do you think that this man doesn't know well enough to know what his own wife would want" defensiveness? That confounded "obvious" tag, indeed.

He may, like many men, not even reallize that this is a common minefield. In the thread, he was warned of this, and steered away from common pitfalls. Newsflash: men aren't always tops at interpreting their wives, particularily when it comes to sex.

your response could be applied to nearly any askme question.

You may have noticed that I didn't post anything of the sort in the in the thread. I posted it in response to the lame callout.
posted by desuetude at 3:31 PM on August 19, 2006

Erm, realize.
posted by desuetude at 3:32 PM on August 19, 2006

So why all of the "why do you think that this man doesn't know well enough to know what his own wife would want" defensiveness?

Because he's a *guy*, and we often don't?

And the callouts were mostly from women, that I could see.

I posted it in response to the lame callout.

Did you mean "in the Ask"? Or here? Cause I *really* wasn't trying to call out either Methyl or scarabic
posted by baylink at 4:54 PM on August 19, 2006

1. Some women like getting lingerie as much or more than their husbands like giving it.
2. Most women don't appreciate getting lingerie nearly as much as their husbands like giving it.
3. Some women don't believe that category 1 exists, so giving lingerie must be a clear example of 2.
posted by Bugbread at 6:50 PM on August 19, 2006

Methylviolet, I think the assumption that the wife would object to her husband buying her something sexy is rather offensive. Some of us really enjoy the fact that our husbands enjoy us, and we them.

It isn't like he's giving her a gift certificate for liposuction and a boob job, dangit. And if him buying her lingerie is so suspect, what would you say to me if I bought my hubby silk boxers or something? Hm?
posted by konolia at 6:54 PM on August 19, 2006

Okay, I just read that blog post. Too bad she has to take her personal issues out on a poor guy who wants a nice gift recommendation. Making assumptions about their sex life are uncalled for, classless and tacky.

Men are hardwired for interest in sex. That's a basic fact of biology. It is not a personal defect and it does not make him a bad evil husband.

I cannot believe how angry this has made me, and this from a woman who actually does pick up hubby's stray socks and boxers on a regular basis.
posted by konolia at 7:02 PM on August 19, 2006

Right. So why all of the "why do you think that this man doesn't know well enough to know what his own wife would want" defensiveness?

i think we're talking past each other here. perhaps it's because men just don't get women, as you seem to be saying repeatedly.

my point was this: he knows his wife's general tastes and demeanor, but he probably doesn't know what someone like her might like as lingerie, since he is not himself a woman. thus, he posts a question on askme that might draw some responses, including ones that say "careful of what you do here, not all women like lingerie as gifts; be sure your wife does." as such, it's a thoughtful move to ask first rather than simply going out and buying whatever might appeal to him.

the "defensiveness" as you describe it is in reaction to the remarkably nasty tone of methylviolet's response. it's surprising to me that it's still up, i guess because there's a "seconding the bathrobe idea" component to it. but it assumes far too much about the poster and his wife. and i think we can see from methylviolet's posts in this thread and elsewhere where she's coming from -- a seemingly angry place.

Newsflash: men aren't always tops at interpreting their wives, particularily when it comes to sex.

yeah, so? here's a guy trying to do better and he gets jumped on by someone who imputes ugly motivations to him. newsflash for you: women get things wrong too. i wouldn't, however, make such a blanket assertion as you made about women's approach to sex. that would be a hasty overgeneralization.
posted by Hat Maui at 7:12 PM on August 19, 2006

Baylink, no offense. I just meant that this "when should answers also include extrapolation/opinion" thing has been done a bunch of times in MeTa.

HatMaui, I'm not really interested in psychoanalysing Methylviolet based on her lingerie preferences. Her advice was a bit snippy, but, meh. It's mild by full-on JudgeMe standards, and didn't particularly derail the thread. Anonymous learned that lingerie, despite massive marketing to the contrary, isn't entirely a safe choice and that some women get downright snippy about it, along with a bunch of good suggestions.

Where did I make "a blanket assertion about women's approach to sex?"
posted by desuetude at 8:00 PM on August 19, 2006

And why does anonymous have to learn " that lingerie, despite massive marketing to the contrary, isn't entirely a safe choice and that some women get downright snippy about it."

He did not ask for your opinion about lingerie as a gift for his wife. He asked for recommendations for lingerie suiting his wife.

Why do feel so entitled to question his judgement?

Are you a disappointed woman? Are you bitter? Have you dealt with tone-deaf men in your life? Why do you assume so much in the questioner?

Those are not nice or decent questions, are they?

Those questions are as about as decent as you automatically assuming that here's another clueless man about to embark on a stupid gift idea for his wife because he doesn't know shite about what his wife thinks as sexy?

Your world paradigm does not fit everyone. There are alot of people in the world who don't think like you do. Why assume so much?
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 8:50 PM on August 19, 2006

""strangers on the internets" (paging samuel jackson) "

"I want these motherfucking strangers off the motherfucking internets."
posted by klangklangston at 2:03 AM on August 20, 2006

Where did I make "a blanket assertion about women's approach to sex?"

you claimed that "men aren't always tops at interpreting their wives, particularily when it comes to sex," as if misinterpreting the other sex as pertains to sexuality is somehow unique to men. i would make no such generalization about women, because doing so would be logically faulty.

lingerie, despite massive marketing to the contrary, isn't entirely a safe choice

this is particularly "revealing" -- you're basing your objections on some received notion that victoria's secret or somebody controls male libido such that poor women the world over are perpetually in receipt of unwanted bras and panties? may eros have mercy on your soul.
posted by Hat Maui at 2:41 AM on August 20, 2006

Oh, for pete's sake. Now we're going to psychoanalyze ME based on assumptions about my lingerie preferences and a host of other jumping-to-conclusions.

I didn't automatically assume anything. In the AskMe thread, I made a gentle suggestion. Here, in the MeTa thread, I'm finding it somewhat silly that people are getting their knickers in a twist over the suggestion that advising the guy to be careful about the "lingerie as sexy gift" thing is bad advice.

Please don't put ridiculously false syllogisms in my fingertips. In no way does the statement "men aren't always tops at interpreting their wives" = "women, however, always understand their husbands."

However, I rephrase:

Based on damn near the entire "relationships" tag on Ask Metafilter, individuals in relationships sometimes have difficulty interpreting each other's wishes or communicating clearly. A disconnect is especially common on the subject of appearance, sexuality, and demonstrations of affection. For reference, see "Do I look fat in these pants?", "Does penis size really matter?", "My partner wants too much/not enough sex", "How should I propose?", and many other examples.

I affirm that I fully support gift-giving as a lovely gesture to one's significant other. I also affirm that my SO and I sleep happily naked, but I do love silk as loungewear, in case anyone thinks that I need to feel sexier.
posted by desuetude at 1:09 PM on August 20, 2006

Desuetude: Got it. I suppose that should have been obvious, but I've been offline about four years and missed it.
posted by baylink at 3:31 PM on August 20, 2006

I also affirm that my SO and I sleep happily naked

desuetude, (n): a state of inactivity or disuse volunteering intimate details so as to make strangers on the internets more familiar.
posted by Hat Maui at 7:54 PM on August 20, 2006

you know, up until all this, i was actually thinking about taking methyl up on her offer to mail me a hindi mix cd. now i'm kinda scared of her.
posted by echo0720 at 9:01 PM on August 20, 2006

desuetude, (n): a state of inactivity or disuse volunteering intimate details so as to make strangers on the internets more familiar.

Yep. That's me. Hat Maui, you do find me sexy, right?
posted by desuetude at 6:08 AM on August 21, 2006

sure i do.
posted by Hat Maui at 9:33 AM on August 21, 2006

Metafilter: getting all Dworkin on your sleazy ass.

Seriously, this thread makes my day. This is better than the TEEVEE.
posted by scrump at 3:53 PM on August 21, 2006

Well, since someone didn't like it on the wasp thread, I guess I'll close out over here with it instead:

MetaFilter: Perhaps You'll Die.
posted by baylink at 7:44 PM on August 21, 2006

Let's see: I'm not sure the punishment (quoting from methyl's blog in a MeTa thread without her permission), insinuating that she's sexually dysfunctional and "frustrated", accusing her of going "Dworkin" (is that code for, like, dyke or something?), etcetera, fits the crime: a brisk reminder that many women-- and I'm one of them-- might not receive lingerie well as a gift. It's not an uncommon mistake or misjudgement, you know? Chill. The OP might not have previously considered this, given, as was pointed out upthread, the massive amount of marketing that's done in order to apparently convince women that wearing fancy underwear is somehow empowering. Lingerie is not automatically a good choice of gift, especially if it's cheaply made, like Victoria's Secret stuff. I mean, you really don't want to see Anonymous posting a few weeks from now about how he gave his wife lingerie for her birthday, and it ended badly, and he can't figure out why, do you?
posted by jokeefe at 3:54 PM on August 22, 2006

Hmmm, misused brackets in that comment. Ah well.
posted by jokeefe at 3:58 PM on August 22, 2006

Well, the "crime" is not reminding someone that many women might not receive lingerie well as a gift, it's insinuating outright stating that the poster is presenting the gift, not as a present for his wife, but for himself. Insinuating sexual dysfunction or frustration is a bit overboard, but it is in line (in the sense of "in a similar vein") with the "crime".

jokeefe : "accusing her of going 'Dworkin' (is that code for, like, dyke or something?)"

I think it's code for "taking a generally anti-male stance", not lesbianism. If that seems unclear, think about it in terms of, I dunno, dogs and cats. When someone says "Dogs suck", that doesn't mean they want to have sex with cats. They might, but one can be anti-dog and pro-cat without sex being involved. Not saying the Dworkin thing is justified, just putting forth my understanding of "Dworkin" as a descriptor.
posted by Bugbread at 3:24 AM on August 23, 2006

insinuating that she's sexually dysfunctional and "frustrated"

ahem. i believe it was methylviolet who went ugly, not anyone else. i refer you to the following:

But Hat Maui, you must have missed the FAQ.
Stupid people are not allowed to read my blog.
I am sorry that Mrs. Hat Maui is sexually dissatisfied with you, but please don't take it out on me. I recommend porn.

did you just not see that, or willfully ignore it?
posted by Hat Maui at 1:57 PM on August 23, 2006

Oh for Heaven's sake. Can't you find someone else to jerk off about? If my answer in the lingerie thread was so very offensive to you, I can't imagine how twisted your panties will get when you encounter one of our many unabashed (and very entertaining) trolls here on AskMe.

Baylink's question was not -- "is Methylviolet correct?" Nor was it "is Methylviolet... SATAN?" Baylink's question was this -- correct me, Baylink, if I misrepresent -- when the OP asks for advice on picking A or B, is it a derail to tell him that what he really wants is C? My comment was a pretty brusque example of that, that is true. Right here in the thread both Jessamyn and Mathowie assessed my post and answered Baylink's question -- to wit: "Meh. Methy is fine."

But Hat Maui still had a problem with me. I have helpfully highlighted for you his initial (to say nothing of subsequent) stupidity, and "ugliness". Posted, of course, before my reply that he quotes above.

1. 'I could have been all dignified.' "like you were in your blog post about it?" Hat Maui fails to see the difference between crapping in a thread and crapping (if you want to call it that) in a personal blog, implies I am undignified.
2. "his wife, whom he knows and you don't, methyl. that's all. then you had to get all dworkin on his "sleazy" ass."Hat Maui (a) points out that I do not know the OP's wife, (b) misrepresents what I said on my blog. Says I went "Dworkin" -- a cryptic remark. Perhaps this is a testicle-deficient way of saying I hate men?
3. "insulting non-answer posted in the thread itself, you have this to offer on your blog:" Hat Maui again references the blog, calls my answer (a) insulting, and (b) a non-answer.
4. "But the word 'unhinged' comes to mind." Again, this may be a testicle-deficient way of saying that I am unhinged.

For those who missed it, I never said Jack about the OP specifically on the blog-- I don't have a beef with the OP, I just disagreed with his plan. I opined in a general way about buying lingerie and male sexual frustration, in a clearly self-mocking way that was intended to be humorous.

Hat Maui's strong reaction to my really pretty innocuous remarks, both in the AskMe and on my blog, must imply... well, that he has a micro-penis. I could be wrong, you know, no offense. It is only my opinion.

Now that Hat Maui (and others) have given their opinions of me most exhaustively in this MeTa -- I'm an angry person, crazy, a man-hater, whatever -- and even flung their poo at the far more moderate and rational Desuetude...

Christ. Let's move on.

If it would make you too sad to let this go, Hat Maui, please feel free to leave a comment on my blog... I will be very happy to trade insults with you there.
posted by Methylviolet at 3:28 PM on August 23, 2006

Hat Maui is a jerk, but I doubt this somehow relates to having a small penis or small testicles. (I would love to see Metafilter's reaction if someone, in earnest, described a female poster's bad behaviour as being due to her flatchestedness).
posted by Bugbread at 3:40 PM on August 23, 2006

Or the looseness of her vagina, bugbread. Don't forget the looseness of her vagina.

Seriously, the pages-long point-by-point riposte works a lot better when you refrain from that kind of "micro-penis" bullshit. It's possible to state clearly and firmly how you feel, cite the evidence you feel backs you up, and not be a jackass in the process.
posted by cortex at 3:44 PM on August 23, 2006

your even tone and temperament acquit you well, methylviolet.

bugbread, i don't think you are correct about me being a jerk. i'll check, but i'm pretty sure you're wrong.
posted by Hat Maui at 5:36 PM on August 23, 2006

also, this?

Right here in the thread both Jessamyn and Mathowie assessed my post and answered Baylink's question -- to wit: "Meh. Methy is fine."

straight up delusional. here's what they actually said:

jessamyn: MethylViolet sounded a little "nyeah nyeah" in her tone and scarabic sounded a little crotchety in his, and if it ends there in that thread it will be okay with me.

mathowie: meh, I think scarabic protests too much and we should remove that comment.

so one vote for "you were a little snotty" and one vote for deletion of your comment. somehow, to you, their comments were absolution. that speaks volumes about your relationship with reality.
posted by Hat Maui at 5:58 PM on August 23, 2006

bugbread, i don't think you are correct about me being a jerk. i'll check, but i'm pretty sure you're wrong.

Without any strong convictions on the subject, I'm will to state anecdotally that you do, at least, often come on strong.
posted by cortex at 6:11 PM on August 23, 2006

i have to overcompensate for my micropenis. sorry.
posted by Hat Maui at 6:31 PM on August 23, 2006

also, in fairness to methyl, i now realize that mathowie's "we should remove that comment" could be in reference to scarabic's; however, that would strike me as a bit odd.
posted by Hat Maui at 6:33 PM on August 23, 2006

Don't forget the looseness of her vagina.

I know I can't. I lost ten men that night.

Sometimes I wake up screaming.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 7:00 PM on August 23, 2006

Alright, enough! That's it, I'm warning you...I've got Simone de Beauvoir in one hand and The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets in the other. And I'm going to START READING ALOUD if you don't all fucking drop it.

Also, I'm wearing nothing but a pair of silk boxers.
posted by desuetude at 7:26 PM on August 23, 2006 [1 favorite]

I'd like to see more posts about vaginal slackness.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 7:35 PM on August 23, 2006