I mean, why set-up the "cover story" of them shagging if Sam didn't believe that was really Dean?

But she was only on the sidelines of the scene until after Bobby had established that it was really-o truly-o Dean. Her playing the part of a one-night stand is an easy way for her to get out of there without anyone asking questions as to who she is. (Note that she initiated that situation by saying that she should go...)

From re-watch (and the scene being included in the Previouslies), the moment of recognition in the diner when Sam said "Ruby" was a little bit "of course you're in that body now, too". Or something. It didn't read to me as if he had seen Ruby in that body before, but he wasn't unsurprised.

I could buy into that, except that I got the impression Sam had spent his summer vacation time without Dean working with Ruby to develop his demon-dusting mind tricks. If she wasn't in Kathy/Kristy, what body was she in?

Cindy/Sandy, Molly/Holly, Tracy/Teri, etc.

But she was only on the sidelines of the scene until after Bobby had established that it was really-o truly-o Dean.

Yes, but in her underwear.

I don't know. I would rather have to handwave them as not having had sex than think that Sam had sex with some random girl and then Ruby possessed her without Sam even raising an eyebrow about it.

Yes, but in her underwear.

I still think maybe they were sharing a hotel room. Ruby needs someplace to keep her meatsuit, and since it doesn't belong to her she's probably not overly fussy about what she dresses it in.

(Besides, it's not like this show is immune from television's love of random inappropriate nudity.)

I think this is what Misha meant by fine tooth comb. But it makes a difference. Did they or didn't they, and if they did, at what point did Sam know it was Ruby?

FTR, I don't think they did. I'm comfortable in that camp.

Meg was throwing arguments very similar to fan objections I've heard at Dean. What I can't tell is if Kripke was trying to make a point by having her be the effective villain of that scene, or if Dean's acknowledgment of guilt was supposed to set the tone.

Yeah, I'm not sure. I suspect the show is on the fence, but I do appreciate that they acknowledged the issue--no matter how hamhandedly. This episode was full of anvils.

But either way, if the body is unharmed, it can be returned intact, so yeah, there's definitely an element of nonconsensual sex/rape here, and Sam should have to deal with that.

Yeah, I caught that, Wolfram. They didn't quite acknowledge it, and it's still unsettled as to whether the Kristy in the first scene in the motel was actually Ruby, or if Ruby possessed her afterwards. Sam's reactions aren't sufficiently telling to make it clear. For the character's sake, I'd like to believe Sam wouldn't sleep with Ruby; on the other hand, it would make his ethical position a little more complicated and interesting, especially given the text in this week's episode. I just want to show to acknowledge it, though, if Sam actually has been sleeping with Ruby.

Also, WTF was that about Meg-the-demon dressing Meg "like a slut"? Tank tops and jeans and leather jackets make a slut now? Oh, dear. Shame on you, Sera--Meg had lots of issues, but she wasn't particularly sexually provocative, except in that one episode where she crawled all over Sam. Most of the rest of the time she was just dangerous.

Random thought--now that we are already in the fourth season, can we start thinking about a spin-off, please, Kripke? Castiel: The Series.

Also, WTF was that about Meg-the-demon dressing Meg "like a slut"?

I have been trying to hand-wave this as "more like a slut than human!Meg would have dressed". Maybe human!Meg was on the uptight side.