t kicks picture of Riley with Skinny Vampire Girl out of his head
It's called a blaster, Will, a word that tends to discourage experimentation. Now, if it were called the Orgasmater, I'd be the first to try your basic button press approach.
Xander ,'Get It Done'
Buffy and Angel 1: BUFFYNANGLE4EVA!!!!!1!
Is it better the second time around? Or the third? Or tenth? This is the place to come when you have a burning desire to talk about an old episode that was just re-run.
Gus - May 14, 2005 8:13:49 pm PDT #784 of 10725
Bag the crypto. Say what is on your mind.
Gris - May 14, 2005 8:57:12 pm PDT #785 of 10725
Hey. New board.
I bet Buffy and Riley had pretty intense sex in that one episode where their lust was supporting the pain of a thousand ghosts or whatever.
Man, I hated that episode.
But I hated Smashed more.
So Buffy+Riley intense sex is better than Buffy+Spike, by my logic.
§ ita § - May 14, 2005 8:58:51 pm PDT #786 of 10725
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
For me it doesn't count as emotionally intense when you're possessed/driven by ghosts.
But that's just me and my sex life. I don't mean to speak for everyone.
Gris - May 14, 2005 9:17:13 pm PDT #787 of 10725
Hey. New board.
If I remember the episode correctly (doubtful), weren't the ghosts brought into a more powerful existence because of their lust first? They made them focus on it more, but it had to be there before they noticed. I mean, the ghosts weren't coming out for any of the other sex-having couples in that frat house, and there had to be several. Graham, at least, seemed like a playa. Even if you argue it was the Slayer, specifically, being lustful that caused them to latch on, it still seems she must have been feeling it pretty good.
t /still love Riley and screw you all
Gus - May 14, 2005 9:41:45 pm PDT #788 of 10725
Bag the crypto. Say what is on your mind.
There has to be some point to this conversation.
OK, maybe not.
BuffyNImmotal4EVAH!!!!one!
§ ita § - May 14, 2005 10:03:42 pm PDT #789 of 10725
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Hot sex does not have to be emotionally intense.
P.M. Marc - May 14, 2005 11:00:34 pm PDT #790 of 10725
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
Hot sex does not have to be emotionally intense.
Too true.
Am-Chau Yarkona - May 14, 2005 11:02:46 pm PDT #791 of 10725
I bop to Wittgenstein. -- Nutty
Love's hard to quantify, but I think that she didn't love Riley as much as she wanted to, and that she loved Spike more than she wanted to.
Gris - May 15, 2005 6:49:09 am PDT #792 of 10725
Hey. New board.
Hmm. Guess we were using different meanings of "intense." I was just thinking "hot."
Sorry if I came off belligerent last night. Sobriety was not part of the equation.
brenda m - May 15, 2005 6:52:11 am PDT #793 of 10725
If you're going through hell/keep on going/don't slow down/keep your fear from showing/you might be gone/'fore the devil even knows you're there
I was just thinking "hot."
Hot? Their anti-chemistry literally put the fire out in the room.