This conversation has gotten to the point where I can't even tell what hair we're trying to split.
::sits next to Cass::
::ogles amych's smarty pants::
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
This conversation has gotten to the point where I can't even tell what hair we're trying to split.
::sits next to Cass::
::ogles amych's smarty pants::
I thought splitting hairs was part of our mission statement.
Only if we do it naked.
While getting in each other's pants.
Does lack of pants make it easier (because no barriers) or harder (because... no pants) to get in 'em?
1879 [link]
but that's not how they're using it. They're using it as a synonym for "monitor". Today on NPR they were talking about how they need to find a way to monitize (monetize?) internet content to make sure writers get paid for their work. I suppose it's possible they meant, "turn internet content into money" but I don't think so.
I'm not sure anyone is splitting hairs. It's all such a twisty and turny area anyway. I like the discussion though.
I used to think I was fairly open minded. I had no problem with gays and lesbians, and in fact stood in support. Then there were transvestites- that was new, but I learned. Then transexuals. Then swingers. Then polyamory(though I may have that reversed). But, I appreciate every chance to learn, understand and become more accepting.
Now, I think there's very little between consenting adults I don't accept on some level.
What if one is wearing a kilt?
Does lack of pants make it easier (because no barriers) or harder (because... no pants) to get in 'em?
This is why yours are smarty pants, sweetie.
With or without panties?