The Best Of Both Worlds
Following up on this post about earning sex with extravagant gifts. Not to put too fine a point on it, but this ad, found via Jamie at Masculinity and Its Discontents...
...points in the right direction. Ok, ok, the right direction happens to be in *their* rear-view mirror but it's there none-the-less. Give each other all the gifts you like, but if you want her to go down on you? Well chances are she'd like you to go down on her too! And since *it is* that time of year, this would be a good time to remember that sometimes to give and to receive are *both* incredibly pleasurable. You can always exchange presents too.
I was just getting to mentioning this ad in the previous post. This one drive me bat shit crazy, cause you are "not that guy" you should buy her a diamond. WTF is "that guy", someone who does something nice for his SO or a guy who isn't a total asshole. This ad drives me crazy.
[Right! And the thing is that even the graciously fawning toenail-polishing Sensitive New Age Guy is a bit of an artifact in the sense that outside of maybe service BDSM not even the most attentive partner attends his or her paramour so, um, attentively. Nor would diverting himself from the ordinary pursuit of the worthiness myth in support of her beauty myth necessarily indicate progress. But even tossing all that aside, the alternatives aren't, waiting on your partner hand and, literally, foot or buying her "you shouldn't haves." Thanks, BR. --fl]
See, this is why I don't watch TV. Stupid ass commercials (and laugh-tracks that ruin all the jokes).
Additionally, jewelry doesn't work for me. Though I do dislike most jewelry and really dislike diamonds. Clear? How boring (even if sparklie).
Though I do have a FWB who would do that for more most eagerly. ;) But he does adore serving.
[Agreed. I actually used to make jewelry and other small metal bits and pieces like reproduction instrument keys (campus job in a "fine metals" lab.) And I don't care much for jewelry either. As for stones, if I was going to go there it would be things like limestone from the top of Mt. Everest or tiny specks of moon rock or meteorites from the south pole, y'know, something of *conceptual* rarity and value instead of sparkly gravel. Thanks, Q. --fl]
ugh. let's translate the "because you're not that guy" line: "why bother spending time with her when you can just buy the same identical lump of carbon as every other well trained consumer-man?"
i'm so with Qilzas here, *clear* rocks, no matter how sparkly, way lame.
i'd *way* rather have him paint my toes, or give me a foot rub, or anything that involved spending actual time with me, than a fistful of diamonds.
["Spending actual time with me..." That's the issue, right? Like in that "because you're not that guy..." assumes "that guy" comes home to his partner's domain and caters to her in it. (Which is part of why "that guy" is just more of the same old paradigm too.) And to stay away extra so you can bring home *rocks?* Heh. Thanks, Fireweaver. --fl]