The Missionary Position

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

How has this become a byword for boring/routine sex? Is it the N0r@h J0n3s of sexual positions? Isn't it a bit selfish to tut-tut at bad sex when so many people aren't getting ANY?

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 10:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I've always wondered why the Missionary Position is called the Missionary Position but been too embarrased to ask. This would seem like a good time to do so.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 10:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Regardless of that, my theory is it probably suits you if you are incredibly lazy.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:00 (twenty-two years ago)

There's nothing wrong with the missionary position - especially variations thereof like 'The Cat'.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:00 (twenty-two years ago)

The term derives from Christian missionaries' supposed advocacy of this position over other copulatory positions.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:03 (twenty-two years ago)

When lexicographers go WILD!

― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:05 (twenty-two years ago)

It's called the Missionary Position because it was introduced to "evil" "heathen" tribes who did it in unusual ways by missionaries who Hated Fun, along with other fun-killers such as CLOTHES and Christianity along with the "conversion" process.

It's refered to as vanilla sex because it's not particularly enjoyable for the female, i.e. she is trapped, helpless beneath thrusting male, unable to utilise her own hip-swivelling fun. Obv, I'm not particularly a big fan, esp. with the skinny-hipped DDB's who leave my thighs looking like a boxer's face after a particularly energetic bout - buttocks are padded for a reason, boys! Use them! But it can be OK occasionally, esp. if the man is nervous and/or hesitant, as it seems to work for boys.

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:05 (twenty-two years ago)

It's been 30 seconds since I posted that and Dan has said NOTHING. Hey! What's WRONG?!?!? I'm not sure I like this kinder, gentler new ILE!

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:11 (twenty-two years ago)

It's refered to as vanilla sex because it's not particularly enjoyable for the female, i.e. she is trapped, helpless beneath thrusting male, unable to utilise her own hip-swivelling fun

I love the feeling of my partner's body pressing down on mine. And I would only feel trapped if I asked him to hold me down hard or something (and this would be a good trapped). Hip-swiveling is still possible as well as muscle control. Don't you like the feeling of wrapping your legs around your partner's back?

I am thin and the people I sleep with are thin but I've had no trouble with bruising. You've just got to wriggle about until it feels good, surely?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:15 (twenty-two years ago)

the missionary position is rubbish. i would very almost rather go without..

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Missionary = crap. 69 and lazy blerk position are the future!

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:27 (twenty-two years ago)

"People who say the missionary position is crap aren't doing it right."

Would this be an unfair thing to say? Would it seem less unfair if "the missionary position" was replaced by "69ing", say?

Also - has it become a 'default' setting? When you had hetero sex for the first time was it in the m.p.?

(This sort of constant questioning is why I don't usually start sex threads!)

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:31 (twenty-two years ago)

"People who say the missionary position is crap aren't doing it right."

this might be true in some cases but i think it's largely piffle. aside from anything else it's all personal preference. i hate missionary because it feels awkward and wrong, plus i hate being in a dominant position..

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Are we all working from the same definition i.e woman and man lie facing each with the man on the top??

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:35 (twenty-two years ago)

i assume so

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:36 (twenty-two years ago)

plus i hate being in a dominant position..

Now I'm beginning to understand - this position can put more of a focus on the chap's performance. That is why I would tend not to adopt this position with an inexperienced lover. Then it could be less than thrilling, especially if he didn't have great rhythm or staying power.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:37 (twenty-two years ago)

I dunno, I don't mind it... but then again thats because when I'm not on top I make up for it with ummm... some rather hip-cracking leg gymnastics. I spose it isnt really missionary then, is it? Just cause a gal is on the bottom doesnt mean she can't get into the groove so to speak.

(plus, I'm lazy, its easier to lie back and get all the attention! ;P)

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Woman on top=not missionary? Count me as anti-it then

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:39 (twenty-two years ago)

69 = also CRAP. You can't concentrate on giving or receiving properly.

Default position for sex, "naturally", actually = doggy style. Look at every other type of primate. Maybe this just arises (heh) out of my love of spooning.

Yes, the first time for me was missionary, and maybe that's why I hate it, and maybe that's why the sense of being "trapped". I hate it unless the guy is very beautiful and I want to look at him, or I'm v. comfortable with him, which is quite rare.

I bruise very easily, I always have. Missionary position also sucks if there is a height/size difference between partners. My last two BF's have been smaller than me, and this is v. problematic.

It's also a control issue. I don't like woman on top if I'm bigger and I feel like I'm going to crush the boy. Side by side = much better.

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:42 (twenty-two years ago)

What is lazy blerk position? I have an idea, but it is best for all that I do not describe.

― Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Actually come to think of it... sticking to any one position during a whole shag=crap. No matter which one it is. Liven it up, I say. Theres nothing like those sore thighs the next day ...errm I think I've said too much now.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:44 (twenty-two years ago)

That's what I'm saying!!! Missionary just means that you face your partner and he's on top - leg gymnastics, muscle clenching, hip wriggling do not change this. So it is really missionary and IT CAN BE FUCKING AMAZING!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Thanks Lara, I was beginning to feel like a bit of a sex nerd :/

Yeah, what Lara said.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Trayce's right again. Moving about is good but not too much *i.e at three minute intervals) and please don't change position once you've just got a good rhythm going!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:46 (twenty-two years ago)

eh, i don't remember what it's like anyway so you can safely ignore me

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:47 (twenty-two years ago)

(at least this thread's popularity might kill the norah jones one. go for it)

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:47 (twenty-two years ago)

My third qn up top hasn't been touched by anyone I notice.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:48 (twenty-two years ago)

I was beginning to feel like a bit of a sex nerd :/

Me too but I was refusing to believe it. Sex is brilliant and I refuse to slag off any positions. It's all about variety and lest we forget *cue violins* bodies and closeness.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:49 (twenty-two years ago)

So is hating the missionary position a bit like hating indie?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Isn't it a bit selfish to tut-tut at bad sex when so many people aren't getting ANY?

I can't see how having an opinion can be deemed selfish, regardless of situation. I can be hungry and hate peas all at the same time - I don't see the difficulty.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:51 (twenty-two years ago)

It's like hating Top 40, Matt. :)

But Lara there are millions starving who would love those peas etc etc

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Tom: I do agree its a bit unfair that "man on top, gal underneath" should be regarded as "vanilla". "Missionary" gives it that vibe because of its, well, its missionary vibe.

IMHO, vanilla sex is any sex where you just go through the motions and it either does nothing, or is just "kinda nice". Thats now how its sposed to be! Its sposed to be fun and sexy and exhausting and intense and spirtitual. When it works right anyway :D To quote someone I've been with recently "wow, so *thats* how its sposed to happen". He seemed genuinely blown away.

Um. No pun intended. Heh.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Vanilla's nice sometimes. Especially with chocolate.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:54 (twenty-two years ago)

But Lara there are millions starving who would love those peas etc etc

Still don't see the difficulty - they can have 'em! Why should someone feel guilt? This is madness!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:55 (twenty-two years ago)

I prefer vanilla to banana.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Bananas on their own are nice sometimes, and with fritters they are great, but banana flavoured things are gross.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Vanilla's nice sometimes. Especially with chocolate.

Fnarr

― Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I think "kinda nice" sex is good too though! Though I guess if I was single I might not.

I am joking about the peas. It is a big concern of mine though - we live in a society which seems to see sex more and more as a right and I feel for the poor bastards who can't get any. On the other hand a "you're lucky just to be getting it" attitude isn't conducive to fulfilment either.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

(PS. Not got time to write a whole email yet today, Lara.)

Peas are ALWAYS minging.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Banana flavoured things are my life! And peas are my favourite veg! Nick you are the anti-me!!!

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Give peas a chance.

― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:57 (twenty-two years ago)

My genius is, as yet, untapped. Where's Dan when you need him?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:57 (twenty-two years ago)

On the other hand a "you're lucky just to be getting it" attitude isn't conducive to fulfilment either.

Damn straight. How does one justify constantly turning it down, despite the fact they know they're not going to really enjoy it?

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:57 (twenty-two years ago)

That's why there's chocolate AND vanilla, folks. I have my reasons for disliking it, you obv have yer reasons for enjoying it. I'm not going to pretend to tell you how you should do it, I can just say how it works for me, and try to find a boy who gets off on the same things I do. (I mean, my fave is the spooning thing, he holds you around the waist as you go to sleep, you wake up in the middle of the night with the sticky morning after hornies and you just kinda wiggle together as you are, arms around yer waist feels very secure and nice, and lots of freedom for both parties) I'm not caling you girls boring, I'm just saying that's not for me, and I don't want to feel like a freak for enjoying something that isn't Top-40.

Question three: sheesh, it's been MONTHS since I got any, is it selfish for me to be happy to get it the way I want it when I didn't get any since last year? No, sex with the wrong person, in the wrong way is NOT better than no sex at all. I'd rather be by myself than be with someone who isn't doing it for me.

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah Im a bit biased right now, I'm single and have a great shag-buddy relationship with a best friend, best sex Ive ever had and no complications, so I think I should stop bleating now and go to bed.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Me and Tom had better not ever meet - matter + anti-matter = BOOM!

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't like chocolate.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:02 (twenty-two years ago)

this thread is bringing up bad emotions and i'm outta here

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Guys, it's only sex. Didn't anyone see The Book Group last week?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:04 (twenty-two years ago)

My third qn up top

hur hur hur.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:04 (twenty-two years ago)

You don't like chocolate? Weird woman.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:10 (twenty-two years ago)

All Trayce and I were doing after the torrent of 'it's terrible/boring/dull/non-adventurous' was saying that it could be good and could be spiced up as much as any position.

I wouldn't dream of suggesting someone do something they weren't into. Well, I might dream of it but I'd never do it.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:10 (twenty-two years ago)

It does nothing for me. I like candy.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Define 'candy'.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:11 (twenty-two years ago)

This thread scares me.

― Graham (graham), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:12 (twenty-two years ago)

I felt like a bit of a sap on writing 'candy' but I thought it was the best way to describe sweets (as some people describe chocolate bars with this term). I like things like Haribo jellies, Skittles, Jelly Tots and old-fashioned boiled sweets.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh aye, cool. I thought you were a fucking yank for a mo'.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:19 (twenty-two years ago)

*checks to see if anyone's looking*

Ha ha.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:20 (twenty-two years ago)

Kids and adults love it so!

Are Skittles Sours nice?

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:21 (twenty-two years ago)

There good but every time I've had them I've got really bad acid indigestion. i think i eat them too quickly.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:22 (twenty-two years ago)

http://alantrewartha.20m.com/TITS1.jpg

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Love Hearts! I ate a packet of those last night - love 'em!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Boyfriend talking about Haribo on sex thread, C/D?

― suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Kids and adults love it so, the happy world of Haribo!!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Girl, that's fucked up.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Skittles are not Haribo. I don't talk about sex on the interweb but dammit I want to say something on this thread so answering Tom's direct question about Skittles seem the way. I want to be everywhere.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:33 (twenty-two years ago)

There is nothing fucked about liking Haribo, mister. I AM CHOSING TO IGNORE THE BLATANT SEX ANALOGY TO BE MADE.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:34 (twenty-two years ago)

If I did eat sweets I would boycott Skittles Sour on the basis of their stoopid ads around Buffy on Sky.

― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I love Haribo, but skittles aren't Haribo. I am making no analogies, I am talking about sweets.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Apropos of nothing, Skittles are made by Mars.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:37 (twenty-two years ago)

they are

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:37 (twenty-two years ago)

I am making no analogies, I am talking about sweets.

What's fucked then?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:38 (twenty-two years ago)

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Skittles aren't Haribo - sorry for landing Ed in trouble.

What's MAOAM like then?

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Badly advertised.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:39 (twenty-two years ago)

But that girl is cute. Almost as cute as Jemima Rooper!

― Graham (graham), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:41 (twenty-two years ago)

It sounds like some secret word of power but what does it taste like?

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:41 (twenty-two years ago)

*repeat to self* Ed is not Matt DC. Ed is not Matt DC.

MAOAM is like a cheap European imitation.

CHECK! THIS! OUT!

http://www.marsbrightideas.com/index.shtml

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Doggy style is not the default for everyone, Kate. First time I tried it with my partner, she mentioned that it didn't work with her--note that's not "for" but "with"--she is angled/padded such that it's a strain on her to tilt the right way, and she doesn't enjoy it nearly as much as, for instance, missionary, of which she is a big fan.

― green orange, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:44 (twenty-two years ago)

GET THIS FILTH OFF MY SWEETS THREAD!!!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 12:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I am losing my mind. Every time you say "Haribo" I read "Horton" and it's doing my mind in, candy and sex and sex and candy and AAARRGGGHHHH!!! Stevie Chick had those sweetharts at the CTCL night, aw, isn't he sweet?

I've been told off for spending too much time interwebbing at work, so I'm going to have to say goodbye, folks, even though this thread was turning so fun. Off home to make THING!!!

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Skittles Sours ming, what is the point, they are supposed to be SWEETS not sours. Though I am partial to Tangfastics.

(This is just about sweets, right? There's not some secret sex code that I don't know about and I've just admitted something really gross?)

― Emma, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh and my source informs me that Maoam is rubbish and smaller than it appears on the ad.

― Emma, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Lara is completely otm in every respect in this thread except for the bizarre dislike of chocolate.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:25 (twenty-two years ago)

This is just about sweets, right?

As thread arbitrater I can confirm that this thread has been successfully hijacked. All references to missionary/doggy/69 subsequent to the love hearts picture are coded references to Curly Wurly/Snickers/Double Decker.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:29 (twenty-two years ago)

right, chocolate finger biscuits. hands up.

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Meep.

I thought you preferred jaffa cakes?

― Emma, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Emma - there does not need to be a code for a love of Tangfastics to be gross.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:34 (twenty-two years ago)

i nibble around the edges and then carefully munch on the underside keeping clear of the chocolate bit. then i finish it off in one swift gobble.

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

if you like a lot of chocolate on yr biscuit join our club

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Creme Eggs - how do you eat yours?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Personally I like to start off with a little nibble and slowly thrust my tongue in until the soft bit is entirely licked out.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:39 (twenty-two years ago)

i had Wine Pastilles yesterday. cross product synthesis madness. bring back wine gums.

do you remember Texan bars, the clothes we wore, what were we on, etc

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:40 (twenty-two years ago)

''Oh and my source informs me that Maoam is rubbish and smaller than it appears on the ad.''

read it as 'maoism' instead of 'maoam'. lets shift this thread to political theory and finally to the war on iraq.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:40 (twenty-two years ago)

i meant fruit gums, obv, not wine gums, which are readily available at yr corner shop

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Fruit gums were murder on the gnashers.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I lost many a filling to Fruit Gums and Chewits back in the days.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Rusty Brown's Ring Donuts to thread!

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:43 (twenty-two years ago)

I was gutted when pacers were removed from the market. I blame Rangers fans and a general anti-Catholic bias in the British establishment.

― Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:46 (twenty-two years ago)

in ref jerry's link, there wz stuff in Sex BC abt the shift from agricultural to urban civ, and you can tell from the bones what kind of sex wz being had (i guess in respect of how they got jumped), and there wz an argt abt the new urban being more patriarchal and unequal in respect of partner-roles (more monog less fluid?), and how this maybe affected the kind of sex routinely being had (ie there wz a change in behaviour to be explained and they found an economic-materialist one)

i can't remember it that well to be honest

"a hazelnut in every bite"

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmmm... I wish I had time to read this entire thread, but I must get back to work. Anyway, I think that the original concept of the missionary position involved very little touching at all. The guy would hold his body up as much as possible, or perhaps a blanket would be in between the two bodies... Sex was only meant for reproduction. All that fun stuff.

I think women can enjoy it as long as they get plenty of down-there lovin' and other types of pre-sex attention. Or, err, that's how I feel anyway...

― S*r*h McL*sky (hmm... I wonder who that is?) (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 13:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Back to the sex, Lara is right about everything. It really does come down to if you're not enjoying it, you're not doing it right, unless you really do have a fear of being trapped under someone, in which case get some counselling.

― Mark C (Mark C), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Mark, if you tell me to get counselling one more time, I'm going to hunt you down and KILL YOU and then I'll REALLY get some fucking counselling.

I think men who enjoy the missionary position need RE-PROGRAMMING.

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Kate, even you said it was a matter of what some people like and what some people don't!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:13 (twenty-two years ago)

I personally suspect that, deep down, the average bloke doesn't really care which position he is having sex in as long as he gets to blow his load at some point in the proceedings.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Matt is sadly OTM.

― Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:21 (twenty-two years ago)

reverse cowgirl is the way to go.

― Chris V. (Chris V), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Mark, if you're not enjoying the sex, there is also the possibility that your *partner* may be fucking up as opposed to fucking.

That is all.

― suzy (suzy), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Chocolate fingers are straws for tea.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Lazy blerk position = woman on top doing her gyrating thang, while bloke lies on the bottom having a read / with his headphones on / watching a film, etcetera, etcetera.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Let's talk about sex, baby. Let's talk about you and me. Let's talk about all the good things and the bad things that may be. Let's talk about sex.

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:47 (twenty-two years ago)

No. Let's get back to sweets.

Where does ILE stand on fizzy cola bottles?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:49 (twenty-two years ago)

DO you mean the old skool cokes in small glass bottles?

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

I LOVE THEM.

this thread needed that.

― g-kit (g-kit), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Disclaimer: tHat statement did not mean to reference the new SNL movie OLD SKOOL.

― Sarah McLUsky (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Apple drops? I love 'em. Even when my mouth is raw, I can't say no.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 14:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Fizzy cola bottles = classic. I once nearly died cos of a cherry drop though.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Fruit salad were grebt and cheap too. I also like Fruitella, which was v. fruity. Mojos were good, esp. the 1/2p ones which were great as they were the only thing I have ever seen that post decimalisation, was worth having the 1/2 for.

― Dave B (daveb), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:00 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm just sick of Mark insisting that I am crazy and I need councelling every time I say something that disagrees with me. I don't care if he's playing, I'm starting to find it really disrespectful and annoying. Maybe I should have said that instead of trying to make a joke in return.

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Fruit salads *are* great. Tsk. You can get fruit salad bars now, which are almost too much of a treat.

Cherry is my favourite fruit flavour. Has anyone ever had a cherry Dip Dab?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:03 (twenty-two years ago)

http://agents.www.media.mit.edu/people/foner/Fun/gravity.html

The Disgusting English Candy Drill from Gravity's Rainbow

― Alan (Alan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:04 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm not convinved that Mark was targeting you in his post, Kate. Even if he was, it could be seen as some soft advice rather than criticism or as a flippant remark?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:09 (twenty-two years ago)

the thing that's weird about the missionary position is that one the evidence of pretty much all other mammals, it's unnatural -- it's less than ideal for getting the sperm to the egg, awkward, involves more effort than other positions, et al. So for it to be thought of as the default position is sorta comparable to thinking of a well-tended garden as the "normal" mode of nature.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:25 (twenty-two years ago)

You mean grass doesn't naturally grow to an inch length and then stop? *weeps*

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:29 (twenty-two years ago)

it's less than ideal for getting the sperm to the egg

Only if your girl doesn't come.

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Most mammals don't stand upright though.

― bnw (bnw), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Only if your girl doesn't come.

No, even assuming a really forceful orgasm on the part of the woman, the missionary position forces the poor little fellows to work against gravity -- the woman's orgasmic contractions help a lot but ideally the cervical mouth isn't picking up 100% of the slack

also as has been noted the m.p. isn't really ideal for clitoral stimulation, essential for that pregnancy-assisting woman's orgasm, etc

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:36 (twenty-two years ago)

John, do you stand your lady on her head?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:39 (twenty-two years ago)

It has been known.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)

isn't really ideal for clitoral stimulation

This runs contrary to my experience. And mechanical logic, really.

Semiotically i guess the M.P. is kind of plain-vanilla but who thinks about semiotics in the sack?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

*sheepishly raises hand*

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:48 (twenty-two years ago)

I should have bet somebody that by 8 am in the morning I encounter a thread with someone asking how John and Lalitree make love. Could have collected millions.

who thinks about semiotics in the sack?

Opening up a can of worms there...how many of us dare to admit that we have moments where one's conscious mind is thinking about something else entirely while the self is otherwise occupied with someone else?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)

To my rescue! This guy doesn't have a notion does he?

JOHN WOULD YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF CATHOLICS IN THE WORLD!

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:49 (twenty-two years ago)

(wz it an ile thread where we discussed what we thought of to ahem de-accelerate climax, and two of the answers were thatcher and oil wells?)

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:52 (twenty-two years ago)

My answer is ILE.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 15:54 (twenty-two years ago)

John, do you stand your lady on her head?

Wait, isn't that what everybody means by "missionary position"?

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:00 (twenty-two years ago)

(note to Lara: that's a joke, there)

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:00 (twenty-two years ago)

(Note to John: jokes are, by definition, funny)

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Missionary can be terrific for clitoral stimulation if you're not just thrusting blindly. Mish with legs on guy's shoulders is fun for boy & girl!!

― Ivor Biggun, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:16 (twenty-two years ago)

Missionary is best for the taoist sets of nine.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:22 (twenty-two years ago)

(Note to John: jokes are, by definition, funny)

Hostile much?

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:25 (twenty-two years ago)

(I thought the "slow down" answer was baseball stats, for us 'mericans at least.)

― bnw (bnw), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:28 (twenty-two years ago)

(Note to John: jokes are, by definition, funny)

No they're not. That's like saying music, by definition, has a melody.

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:37 (twenty-two years ago)

They have sounds and textures. As do jokes. If spoken.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:38 (twenty-two years ago)

She didn't mean what she said, Chris. What she meant to say was "John, you're an asshole."

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Christ Kate, you spend half your life posting things on ILX that indicate you have serious emotional issues you may be happier if you sorted out. You make wild statements, seldom bothering to back them up (which is fine, most of the time, I do it too), but then you start using CAPITAL LETTER INSULTS at anyone who disagrees with you!

Feeling trapped and claustrophobic during something that's suppsoed to be intimate and loving, or at least fun, is not good or desirable. What do you want me to do, applaud it as a lifestyle choice?

I'm sorry I'm so impatient, but the stuff you write really gets my gander up. You give better than you get, so deal with it.

Suzy, yes, of course it might be the other person. The "you" was meant in the plural sense.

― Mark C (Mark C), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:39 (twenty-two years ago)

The main problem with the missionary position: Where do you put the camera?

― Marcel Post (Marcel Post), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Marcel wins.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I didn't read it as quite as hostile as you did, but, um, I don't really have much to say about the missionary position (missionaries didn't really go around giving advice for how two men should romp) so all my contributions are, by default, rhetorical.

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:47 (twenty-two years ago)

In what way should I be re-programmed Kate, along with, let's face it, most of the men on this board.

― chris (chris), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Actually Chris P that's an interesting qn - is there a gay position/sex act that has come to mean 'vanilla' in the same way the m.p. has?

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Can we please be nicer to Kate becuz I really like Kate and I don't think she really means to hurt anybody's feelings or nuffin

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Yus. Kate is cool. :-)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Once again, reverse cowgirl is where its at.

― Chris V. (Chris V), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 16:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Ride the range.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:00 (twenty-two years ago)

"Vanilla" generally means "oral & anal", which is to say "nothing kinky". But since no positions (as far as I know) are considered boring or ho-hum, there really isn't an equivalent to the missionary position.

Well, except that there is a "missionary position" which is modelled as closely as possibile to the hetersexual one. But it doesn't have any of the connotations that it carries in heterosexual sex.

(At least this is how I see it, but I'd be interested to hear if others disagree.)

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:00 (twenty-two years ago)

i like some of the postions the porno stars get into. I really can't see myself asking my wife to let me squat over her and drop it in while her legs are pinned behind her head.

― Chris V. (Chris V), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:02 (twenty-two years ago)

you could if you owned a video camera!

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Feeling trapped and claustrophobic during something that's suppsoed to be intimate and loving, or at least fun, is not good or desirable. What do you want me to do, applaud it as a lifestyle choice?

Well, no, but Kate has realized that it's not good, and has figured out a way to deal with it: Other happy positions that do feel good. So she doesn't end up feeling trapped and claustrophobic. This seems like a reasonable decision. If she was still doing the missionary even though she had hang-ups about it, that would be more troubling.

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:04 (twenty-two years ago)

>>The main problem with the missionary position: Where do you put the camera?
-- Marcel Post (marcel_pos...), February 25th, 2003.<<

and it rules out double penetration

― ken, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:05 (twenty-two years ago)

Thing is, Mark C, why do *MY* "obvious emotional problems" bother *YOU* so much? No one picks out specks in a neighbour's eye unless they've got a log in their own. "Get counselling" is not useful advice to me, it sounds more like you've got some issues of your own you should be addressing instead of being so bothered about mine.

― kate, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:08 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh bullshit. You are crying for help in every fucking post.

― Mark C (Mark C), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:11 (twenty-two years ago)

I prefer MAOAM -the Haribo that's been tested on humans.

― Pete (Pete), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:14 (twenty-two years ago)

surely that'd be HTBTOH?

― ken, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:17 (twenty-two years ago)

I certainly have no speculations on Kate's personal life, but I was a bit surprised by that comment, because I was thinking that loads of people here were dancing around mechanics and procreation and not really taking into account the fact that, you know, many people have sex because they actually like each other -- quite a bit, really -- and they actively enjoy looking at each other as well -- either because they find each other nice-looking or just care enough about each other to think they do -- and quite possibly they feel entirely comfortable about this, being, as they are, trusting intimates, and so maybe the missionary position and similar arrangements, in limited applications, accommodate all of that quite nicely. No, this type of sex (the actually-liking-each-other type, not necessarily missionary) will not account for 100% of a person's total sexual encounters, but if it doesn't account for at least some significant chunk thereof I would not hesitate to submit that someone is missing out on a good portion of what makes sex work for others.

I don't know if feet-over-shoulders counts. It probably should, but you know how people like to come up with separate names for every possible variation on every possible sexual act. It's probably called the California Kit-Kat by now. Anyway, some people seem to enjoy that quite a bit.

Really, I know this is a non-answer but this choice is always going to depend on the people involved, and how their bodies are shaped and function and fit together, and what the context is of what they're going for at the moment, and blah blah etc. And after a long enough time with one person, you know you'll occasionally wind up lying around lazily flipping coins to pick which of you has to get on top and actually move around.

But even anonymously, I'm not sure who'd be brave enough to make big lists that go "oh, girls with big butts you want to get doggy-style, unless they're good-looking, in which case you want them squatting on you, and girls with long thin legs totally get the over-the-shoulder thing, and for nice breasts if they're small you want to do..."

― nab!sco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:23 (twenty-two years ago)

And even anonymously you're still anti-spamming/googling your nickname, I see. ;-)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:25 (twenty-two years ago)

OK, hands up, everybody here who has ever held a psychiatric nursing license. Great: that leaves just me, over ten years' experience in the field working with diverse populations. It's my professional opinion that Kate is not "crying for help in every fucking post." Can we please be a little nicer to each other on a thread which ought to be a nice entertaining smutty one instead of a sniping backbiting one.

Mmmm...backbiting.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Well that list ummm doesn't reflect my personal tastes right right it doesn't. (Actually it really doesn't.)

Also more important than body type is obviously mood. I mean, let's be blunt, certain positions are good for lovey strokey "intimate" stuff, and certain positions are good for all-out pounding, and all sorts of other things, and you really just have to run with that.

― n@b!sco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Mmmm...backbiting.

Backscratching is much more fun.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:29 (twenty-two years ago)

That's such a vanilla thing to say, Ned.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:32 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm vanilla!

I'm with J0hn. I like kate. Chill out, everyone.

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:34 (twenty-two years ago)

of course once you get properly neurotic you get all your pleasure out of backpedaling *cue rimshot*

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh bullshit. You are crying for help in every fucking post.

BULL FUCKING SHIT, MARK. This says SO MUCH MORE about you than it does about me. I've been in therapy on and off since the age of 11. Talking about my problems and my "issues" seems as natural to me as most people feel discussing their wallpaper. It's you who gets upset and bothered and traumatised when people start to discuss anything deeper than basic flippancy.

I don't see everyone else interpreting my basic matter of fact sextalk as being a cry for help.

I'm sick of being told by people, specifically men (and yes, this is an issue with Horton that is spilling over onto the board as well as me being upset at Mark C) that I am "CRAZY" because I don't fit into their narrow definition of what emotions are supposed to be.

I was trying to make light of it with my "men need re-programming" comment, but the truth is, men that *I* sleep with DO need to understand that Mish Style is not going to do it for me. Maybe Mark C is SOOOO bothered by my comments because he realises that he is never going to be one of those men.

― KATE, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:37 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm with J0hn and Sarah. I'm also totally with Lara and Trayce, it's how you do it, and just because the girl is on the bottom doesn't mean she can't do her thing.

And no the first time I had sex she was on top, I've always kind of wondered how alone I am in this.

― Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:37 (twenty-two years ago)

That's such a vanilla thing to say, Ned.

You're surprised?

All I'll note is that if the Other Person prefers to be on top, I'll never ever say no. :-) Yay PLUR and all that.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:39 (twenty-two years ago)

you're not alone - my first time was girl on top, boy underneath. it was still crap.

― --, Tuesday, 25 February 2003 17:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm just a little baffled; who doesn't know how to fuck these days?

(ans: billions I know I know sexual revolution incomplete etc etc)

(also I tried to work out some joke equating 12CD people and sexual ignorants with maybe which bit of musical knowledge = a butt plug but I don't have the wit or brane to do it so someone else please)

― California Kit-Kat (gcannon), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 18:02 (twenty-two years ago)

This thread is kind of weird cause it's totally perfect (Sweets! Sex! Terrific Emma post! Thoughtful 'I say!' N@bisco post!) but has this weird Kate-Mark nastiness going on in the shadows.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Indeed. Can't we just learn to love one another (in a mutually agreed-upon position)?

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:22 (twenty-two years ago)

hahaha.

― RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:25 (twenty-two years ago)

[I'm not laughing at you, chris]

― RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:26 (twenty-two years ago)

Seriously, though, could we have a show of hands for those heterosexuals who have had some conversation vaguely similar to the following:

X: Do you want to?
Y: I'm pretty tired. But if you want to get on top...
X: I'm still really full from dinner. All that bouncing...
Y: Hmm.
X: ---
Y: Move over like this.
X: Oh, hey.

― n@b!sco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:40 (twenty-two years ago)

I have had that conversation, but it was about jumping on bunk beds.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:42 (twenty-two years ago)

That, um, that doesn't sound like a strictly heterosexual conversation, Ñ@ß!$¢ø.

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:43 (twenty-two years ago)

*raises hand*

― Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Y is such a slut.

― bnw (bnw), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:44 (twenty-two years ago)

(Nyatss-click-dollar-cent-oeh? What an odd name.)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Turned up in a WorldCat search:

The missionary position in Eastern Equatorial Africa /
Author: Cust, Robert Needham, 1821-1909
Publication: [S.l.] : [s.n.], 1890

A Statement shewing the present position of the missionaries of the London Missionary Society in Tahiti
Publication: [Papeete? : s.n., 1852

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Randy missionaries: Classic or Dud?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Randy missionaries: Classic.
Missionaries named "Randy": Dud.

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Behold.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Don't forget.

― Amateurist (amateurist), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

(Chris: I don't imagine it is but I didn't want to be too ambitious with my X/Y scripting.)

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:03 (twenty-two years ago)

I mean, unless the X and Y were supposed to represent the second sex chromosomes. In which case, yeah, that's a fairly heterosexual arrangement there.

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:09 (twenty-two years ago)

I obviously have to stick my oar in (oh no!) on a thread like this. I have nothing against the MP, and it is the best for gazing into eyes and kissing while fucking, but because of that, because it's seen by many as the standard, because it's maybe the easiest/most natural for a man to implement whilst kissing and caressing in a horizontal position, it does happen too often. I think that if you fall into that pattern and don't tend to change position much during sex, and keep doing it the same way every time, it gets boring pretty soon. Variety is vital.

Also, different positions suit different people, both physically and by taste, and you have to consider that. I guess I love 69 best, but I'd get bored with that if it was all I had.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Look at that, folks, full name, no google-proofing or nothing.

― n@b!sco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Blimey, I go to bed and the thread is about sex, I wake up and its exploded into a mess of lollies, shouting and sex.

How very kinky.

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:26 (twenty-two years ago)

"I'm sorry, Mr. Skidmore, as much as you are qualified for this lucretive post, I'm afraid we can't hire someone who prefers 69ing to other sexual positions."

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I have nothing against the MP, and it is the best for gazing into eyes and kissing while fucking
Can't you do this with the lady on top? Or have I been doing it wrong?

― rosemary (rosemary), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Doggystyle works too (if you want to gaze into the eyes of/kiss someone besides the person you are giving the bizniz to).

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Or you can just use mirrors. Refracted eye contact, C or D?

― Amateur!st (amateurist), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:44 (twenty-two years ago)

lady on top = missionary if you just FREE YOUR MIND from the arbitrary phallocentric meddling of GRAVITY

― nab!sco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:45 (twenty-two years ago)

(Dude, you have NO IDEA how tempted I am to type in your full name.)

"arbitrary phallocentric meddling" = "dispassionate wank", but "the dispassionate wank of GRAVITY" doesn't scan.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:47 (twenty-two years ago)

Dan, I think we both know that I have been exposed to my fair share of people tagging my full name on threads much less desirable than this one.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Can we talk about peanut butter m&ms?

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Is that a euphemism for coprophilia? Because EW!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:54 (twenty-two years ago)

what are they like? I haven't tried anything other than the original peanut and chocolate ones.

(ha this is deeply freudian)

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:54 (twenty-two years ago)

foodsexfoodsexfoodsexfoodsexfood

― Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Have you eaten while having sexual relations? a la Seinfeld?

I haven't, but I can imagine lots of good combinations.

― Sarah mcLusky (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:57 (twenty-two years ago)

peanut butter m&m are the greates candy of all time and are unavailible in the UK. er gareth.....

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Which position is best for eating?

(ha this is deeply freudian)

― jel -- (jel), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Aren't they the same as reeses pieces?

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:58 (twenty-two years ago)

mmmmpeanutbutterm&ms....

― luna (luna.c), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

PHRASE THAT SOUNDS DIRTY BUT ISN'T: snacking on Reese's pieces

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

not quite the same, Sarah - the m&ms have choklit inside, too

― luna (luna.c), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:03 (twenty-two years ago)

They have cocklets inside? Sweet!

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:12 (twenty-two years ago)

cockles and mussels, alive alive oh

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:17 (twenty-two years ago)

Anyone fancy a Golden Gaytime?

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:24 (twenty-two years ago)

of course. you can't have a gaytime on your own.

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:25 (twenty-two years ago)

golden gaytime = homosexual piss orgy?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:26 (twenty-two years ago)

why not suck on a Fisherman's Friend whilst on the job?

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:28 (twenty-two years ago)

Goes down smooth.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:29 (twenty-two years ago)

it's an ice cream

http://www.dazbert.co.uk/sites/rudefood/food/gaytime.jpg

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:29 (twenty-two years ago)

ironically it does contain Vanilla ice cream

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:31 (twenty-two years ago)

A watersports-themed ice cream?

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:31 (twenty-two years ago)

it takes a lot to get us Aussies excited

― electric sound of jim (electricsound), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:34 (twenty-two years ago)

I would rather have ice cream than a homosexual piss orgy. (If the ice cream is homosexual piss orgy flavored, I'll skip dessert.)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:34 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm allergic to dairy. :-(

― Lara (Lara), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Dan, didn't your mother warn you to try food before you say you don't like it?

― Chris P (Chris P), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:37 (twenty-two years ago)

I totally forgot to mention that when I saw this thread title I assumed it was about Christopher Hitchens.

― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I have nothing against the MP, and it is the best for gazing into eyes and kissing while fucking
Can't you do this with the lady on top? Or have I been doing it wrong?

Yes certainly, Rosemary - I didn't say it was the only position for that, and I'm not at all meaning to be prescriptive or normative. I think I consider MP best for this because when the woman is on top I kind of prefer it if she's more upright, mostly. The motion seems slightly awkward and sort of half blocked when she leans down for kissing - she is kind of trying to thrust backwards, and the pubic bones don't quite want to cooperate. Obviously my reasons apply nearly as well to that position, which might explain why it is, I would think, second most popular.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 22:52 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm starting to think that this is the quintessential ILE thread. It has *everything*.

Well, almost everything.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:45 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.lam.mus.ca.us/cats/C32/mating.jpg

Now it has everything.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Can I set up club reserved for people who think this thread was a bridge too far

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:48 (twenty-two years ago)

non alcoholic, shirt and tie kind of club

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:49 (twenty-two years ago)

The talk about sex or the talk about sweets?

― Ed (dali), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:49 (twenty-two years ago)

I like to keep the two separate.

― Ronan (Ronan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:51 (twenty-two years ago)

DAMN ALL MY ASSIGNMENTS THAT WERE DUE TODAY

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

OK, something Jordan said above (haha) got me wondering: What position did you all lose your virginity in? Me: missionary, with a woman who didn’t really like anything else, unfortunately. (I don’t generally either, though there have been times when it was extremely gratifying, not to mention it’s the position I climax easiest in.)

Also, in my humble (miniscule) experience, m.p. generally worked very well for clitoral stimulation via (a) she holding her legs together while I put my knees outside of them, and (b) thrusting downward rather than up.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:10 (twenty-two years ago)

< /more information than you ever wanted to know about me>

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:10 (twenty-two years ago)

can we go back to sweets now?

― g-kit (g-kit), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Woman on top re; Matos' q.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:23 (twenty-two years ago)

re; Matos' q.

the mish.

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:25 (twenty-two years ago)

(As nobody else has chimed in with it so far...)

A finger of fudge is just enough to give your kids a treat

― Alan (Alan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:26 (twenty-two years ago)

the mish
http://www.musicfolio.com/modernrock/Mission_uk.jpg

― Jerry the Nipper (Jerrynipper), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:29 (twenty-two years ago)

"the mish"! yes! I'm calling it that FROM NOW ON!

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:30 (twenty-two years ago)

glad i could be of some help

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Now it has everything

Nope, it hasn't Reached Rock Bottom yet.

― Madchen (Madchen), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Now it has everything

Nope, it hasn't Reached Rock Bottom yet.

I can't really remember. It was years ago and I was on my way back from playgroup.

Will that do?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:37 (twenty-two years ago)

well, having a rock bottom is yet another argument for the mish....

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Famous rock bottoms: Morrissey? Ummm...

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:43 (twenty-two years ago)

"Rock Bottom" is a great record.

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Homosexual piss-orgy flavoured icecream?

...

― Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Surely that's rock bottom?

― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 12:59 (twenty-two years ago)

i just bought some fruit gums (nestle, but what can you do). Going against the law of sweet nostalgia, these things are MUCH bigger then i remember. they were smaller, not so "tall" with rounded sides (tho obv round from "above" which is different). These new kids are taller with flat sides. they're still much the same with gum/tooth havoc causing.

― Alan (Alan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:25 (twenty-two years ago)

they are also not as hard as they used to be. You really had to suck them to get them to soften in the old days.

(puns not really intended, but what can you do?)

― Ed (dali), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:28 (twenty-two years ago)

what can you do but nestle? = great title for a song

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:28 (twenty-two years ago)

ts: fruit gums shaped like gums vs fruit gums shaped like fruits

― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:29 (twenty-two years ago)

ed, possibly we are better suckers than we were.

― Alan (Alan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:31 (twenty-two years ago)

they are also less shiny.

YOu can recreate the good old days by buying fruit gums from a particularly cold sweet shop.

― Ed (dali), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:32 (twenty-two years ago)

shininess. u r rite.

― Alan (Alan), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:34 (twenty-two years ago)

The lioness looks v. bored. And why are they doing it doggy style? I mean, they are CATS for god's sake. How embarassing!

I lost my virginity in the m.p. It's only gotten better since.

― Sarah McLusky (coco), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:55 (twenty-two years ago)

A finger of fudge is just enough to give your kids a treat

This thread has reached child bottom.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:55 (twenty-two years ago)

And is currently groping.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Surely that's rock bottom?
-- Jody Beth Rosen (edito...), February 26th, 2003.

http://swc.sports-gaming.com/wm2002/images/WM4.jpg

― ken, Wednesday, 26 February 2003 15:10 (twenty-two years ago)

when you feel like you've had it up to here, and you're mad enough to scream, but you're sad enough to tear... that's rock bottom.

― g-kit (g-kit), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 15:26 (twenty-two years ago)

The above picture does not show Rock Bottom, it shows Stone-Cold Steve Austin Bottom.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 18:32 (twenty-two years ago)

It's about to be a Rock Bottom though isn't it? A proto Rock Bottom?

Realises that have let ILE world know I have some acquaintance with sports-entertainment

― Dave B (daveb), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 18:45 (twenty-two years ago)

It's about to hit Rock Penis.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 19:35 (twenty-two years ago)

It's a spunky thread. It's got a way to go yet.

― Lara (Lara), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 19:38 (twenty-two years ago)

that's a rock bottom alright, not as showy as the people's elbow.

― Ed (dali), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 20:41 (twenty-two years ago)

old-fashioned boiled sweets

I've always wondered what these were.

Getting back to the subject*, is the man-stands-between-woman's-legs position still considered missionary?

*Whatever it is. There was an original subject, right? We didn't suddenly start talking about candy, lions fucking, and Kate for no reason, right?

― Christine "Green Leafy Dragon" Indigo (cindigo), Thursday, 27 February 2003 02:13 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't see how that could possibly be considered the missionary position.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 27 February 2003 02:25 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm trying to work out what the woman is doing while the man is standing between her legs. Is she lying down? Standing up? Washing the dishes? Doing the hoovering? Fixing a car?

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 27 February 2003 02:42 (twenty-two years ago)

"Rock Bottom" is a great record.

er...

tired of friction, tired of wishin
tired of doing it only in the missionary position

― g*bbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 27 February 2003 05:59 (twenty-two years ago)

well, have you guys and girls tried the italian chandelier? did your muscles survive the ordeal?

― nathalie (nathalie), Thursday, 27 February 2003 09:28 (twenty-two years ago)

tired of friction, tired of wishin
tired of doing it only in the missionary position

this made me laugh, even though i am sad. thanks.
(wrong song, tho...)

― g-kit (g-kit), Thursday, 27 February 2003 10:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think it has a title track, anyway. It's by Robert Wyatt, I thought it might be redundant to say

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:23 (twenty-two years ago)

zuh. i got confused, fuckhead that i am. ignore me.

― g-kit (g-kit), Thursday, 27 February 2003 11:31 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm trying to work out what the woman is doing while the man is standing between her legs. Is she lying down?

Lying down on a bed or other flat surface. It's my husbands' and my favorite position.

― Christine "Green Leafy Dragon" Indigo (cindigo), Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:04 (twenty-two years ago)

There are a lot of variations to the MP so don't knock it. Also, it is also a good position to be in if you want to pull out and splat on the bird's belly.

― Enormous Genitals, Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:08 (twenty-two years ago)

welcome to the too much information thread.

― g-kit (g-kit), Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:19 (twenty-two years ago)

EG, you are a disgrace to our people.

― Ivor Biggun, Thursday, 27 February 2003 13:35 (twenty-two years ago)

There are a lot of variations to the MP so don't knock it. Also, it is also a good position to be in if you want to pull out and splat on the bird's belly.

That would be rock bottom, right?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 27 February 2003 14:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Yup.

― Lara (Lara), Thursday, 27 February 2003 14:36 (twenty-two years ago)

nine months pass...

Re-reading this thread has made my stomach hurt with laughter.

― Dave B (daveb), Friday, 28 November 2003 14:20 (twenty-one years ago)

variations of it rock!

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Friday, 28 November 2003 14:30 (twenty-one years ago)

Dave this thread had one of the most perfect endings of any ILE thread ever! You wrecker!

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Friday, 28 November 2003 14:41 (twenty-one years ago)

this thread has made re-think how much it's wise to reveal on ile. the other week i admitted to owning the charlatans' best of and i'm still feeling exposed.

― enrique (Enrique), Friday, 28 November 2003 14:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Feel free to delete my post. And this one, obv.

― Dave B (daveb), Friday, 28 November 2003 14:54 (twenty-one years ago)

How about the next one?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 28 November 2003 15:00 (twenty-one years ago)

delete all these new posts and lock the thread!

― stevem (blueski), Friday, 28 November 2003 15:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Agreed.

― Dave B (daveb), Friday, 28 November 2003 15:03 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah!

― enrique (Enrique), Friday, 28 November 2003 15:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Agreed!

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Friday, 28 November 2003 15:07 (twenty-one years ago)

I no longer have the power!

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Friday, 28 November 2003 15:10 (twenty-one years ago)

This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.