Having read several shooting scripts, I think I can say with certainty that the writers are well aware of the hotness of torturned shirtless men.

Oh, come on, share the details Jessica :)

These boys don't grow up and get better. Hitting them with the magic of love, has the same effect the tazer had on BtVS's s4 Adam. They're bad news. Eventually age may mellow them to the point where they're innocuous, at least physically, but I feel like doing an adult public service annoucement Sesame Street filk, every time I read someone wants to F Sawyer.

Word. The woobiefication of Sawyer kind of creeps me out.

The real question is whether there are any characters with sufficient emotional cruelty to knock Sawyer out of his high castle. Assholes do sometimes reform, but it generally requires debasement, a lot of psychotherapy, and possibly a good thrashing.

Actually, I thought Jack made a good start at it in this week's episode. Refusal to tolerate any crap from Sawyer; demonstrating to him just how ugly it could get if other people started treating Sawyer by his own rules; forcing him to yield without playing into his psychodramas.

And even though I think the torture was a mistake, it seems to have had salutary effects on Sawyer. Which I guess doesn't surprise me entirely.

I am so abandoning my painful feminine beauty practices

Hell yeah.

F-Michael (mmm), F-Sayid (mmmmmmmmm), F-Boone (and then quickly discard), F-Locke (there's something about his creepiness that is weirdly compelling).

C-Jin, C-Jack, C-Sawyer as far the hell away from me as possible.

M-Hurley, M-Charlie.

Well, I'd F Sawyer only because he IS bad news. In my view of this game, M is reserved for the truly good guys. F is for the damaged but delicious looking fellows who really know how to kiss. IRL, I long ago learned that generous, healthy, open, supportive men were much more worth loving and the only ones I wanted beside me for the long haul.

F-Boone, Sayid, Scott and/or Steve, Michael, Charlie (if he could be convinced to scrub himself clean under that waterfall)
C-Sawyer, Jin, Hurley, Locke
M-Jack

tavella, to quote someone just use > at the start of a line. So this:

quote

looks like this:

quote

This and other tricks can be found in the quick-edit link just above the posting box.

Oh, and hello! Welcome!

Actually, I thought Jack made a good start at it in this week's episode. Refusal to tolerate any crap from Sawyer; demonstrating to him just how ugly it could get if other people started treating Sawyer by his own rules; forcing him to yield without playing into his psychodramas.

I sorta thought this, too. But I'm not sure that it did convince Sawyer of anything. For one thing, he took the case from Kate because he could. Despite Kate's pretty serious attempts to recover it, he refused to return it without explanation, because he could. Sawyer will always prey on those he feels weaker than himself. I don't think that is going to change very soon. He just fears the wrath of Jack/Sayid.

And, welcome, tavella!

I'm not sure that it did convince Sawyer of anything

Me neither. I think Sawyer took it, as you say, because he could, but that he gave it up because it wasn't that much fun anymore.

I'd also say that preying is a strong word. He's the sort of bully that does pig in the middle (is that the right name?) but no wedgies or swirlies. He's merely annoying.

pig in the middle

? That's not a term I'm familiar with. I woulda said he's the kind to wait until you're off in a corner by yourself, without hope of recourse, and then give you a wedgie. Nothing downright hurtful, like a serious bully giving you a bloody nose and stealing your lunch money. He's vaguely malicious with a side of cowardice.

The game where you take something from the weakling and toss it over their heads back and forth ...

I don't see him quite at the wedgie stage, and certainly not hitting or stealing.