myStrangerFace Home of the Whopper.

Susan

Susan is not able to post on Slog; why? I just keep going round and round back to the "Post Comment" screen and button.

Refresh

May 21 Susan commented on SL Letter of the Day: Have You Ever Heard of...?.

Never encountered the clapping thing, but I was briefly involved with a guy who had a glove fetish. He particularly liked me to slap him in the face (BDSM context) while wearing gloves. I have a whole drawer full of gloves, so this was odd but workable for me.

Mar 7 Susan commented on SL Letter of the Day: The Big Finish.

@40. Yeah, this. There's nothing less appealing than being turned into someone's science project because their ego won't let them take That's How I Work for an answer.

Mar 6 Susan commented on SL Letter of the Day: Sample Sizes.

@68:
Actually, having a dick involved (PIV) can be a little distracting when working up to an orgasm, if what one needs is to concentrate on one focused area/sensation. So yes, it might make it worse.

Feb 7 Susan commented on SL Letter of the Day: You Cucked Up.

Can we declare February 7th Talk Like A Gay Pirate Day? Please?

Feb 7 Susan commented on SL Letter of the Day: You Cucked Up.

@9: yup.

@26: thank you for that; I just about died laughing.

Feb 7 Susan commented on It Looks Like an Exoskeleton.

@33:
Anthony had me until the way over-pumped bicep for "C", which was kind of gross. The doctor was the sexiest (thank you, credits!) and what a wonderful voice he had.

Jan 9 Susan commented on Savage Love.

"Throuple"? Never heard that before and would be just as happy never hearing it again. What a hideous word. I've heard "triad" and "trio" and "threesome" used; any of those seems vastly superior.

Is "throuple" a Seattle thing?

Dec 26, 2012 Susan commented on Savage Love.

@16
I think you should put the training program together anyway. And sell it online. Or at least post it for us. :)

Dec 8, 2012 Susan commented on The Wheels On the Bus Go Round and Round.

@32:

The terms are already getting mashed-up by general public usage anyway, which always wins in the long run over point-in-time semantics. For example: Websters has a definition for 'aint'.

Bad example; that actually demonstrates the reverse. "Ain't" was legitimate English (and was in the dictionary in the 19th century) until language prescriptivists got snippy about it and declared, despite it being in general public usage, that it was improper English, thus leaving an annoying hole in the list of contractions, just as annoying as the lack of a second person plural. I don't know if it ever left the dictionary, but the artificially-created association with vulgarity and lower social classes has made "ain't" toxic, and I don't see that really changing, unfortunately.