silly "would you rather" thread

[starbuck]

I'd **** the shit out of angelina jolie if she wasn't such a whore and weird. But I'd rather have a hotie that was terrible in bed, because as far as I'm aware I'm going to be terrible as well...I'm still a virgin.

Yeah remember when she wore a vial of Billy Bob Thornton's blood around her neck?

[Gribble]

I really don't find her particularly attractive.

[anachronistic]

I think she was just using her as an example... and even though she is extremely beautiful, I am not very attracted to her either.

[shh!]

Hmmm, I may want to rethink what I said earlier. I guess sexual skill is only something that matters when it comes to the guys sexual skills

Don't kid yourself. If a woman lays there as rigid as a board with her eyes squeezed shut and who - though willing - clearly wasn't enjoying it, you wouldn't enjoy the experience nearly as much as you would with someone who actively participated in the act and clearly derived pleasure from it.

As for me - so long as the unattractive person wasn't downright repulsive, I'd probably take the good lover. I can close my eyes and picture George Clooney if I want.

[shh!]

If you're talking about someone who is 50 or 60 years old, then I don't think sex will be an important part of your relationship by that time.

I think you are wrong about this... They wouldn't have the same frequency needs as a 20 year old, but they are more experienced and probably would have higher skill expectations.

[Lipp]

Err, well, assuming that they'd both be pretty equal except for their looks and performance I'd have to go with the unattractive one.

Then again, by physically unattractive, do you mean someone who looks plain or someone who looks ugly? In that case I'd say yes to the plain, but no to the ugly

[Aegis]

ooh, vash makes a good point. If they make it obvious they clearly dislike the sex, that really wouldn't be any fun at all.

[1averagejoe]

I'm going to have to agree...if they aren't enjoying it, I probably won't enjoy it. I'm going to have to change my mind then. As long as their not ugly I'm cool with it, I don't expect myself to get a hot model of a girlfriend anyways. I'm content with an average jane. lol

[Aegis]

Piss on it, I'll still take the hottie, snap a couple photos, do her anyway, then move on. I can get a non-supermodel far more easily. They'd be dumb pictures too; they'd be all taken from arm's length with both us naked, me wearing a shit-eating grin on my face, giving a thumbs-up with my free hand, with the naked super-model looking either disgusted or horrified, rofl

[Illusional]

i think that i'd take the hot one because i wouldn't mind if she just lied there for the first couple hundred times that we would have sex. i would just cum all over her face.

raverboy

[okapa]

None, I love my girl...

[Only-virgins]

That question form a male perspective makes no sense to me. To me a "physical appearance" is part of the "being good in bed". If a girl repulses me than the sex for sure will not be good by default. She can do head stands for all I care it won't work. Lot of what makes good sex for me is VISUAL stimulation.

[Gribble]

Seriously. What is it a girl can do to make sex better? She can moan. She can squeeze. Other than that? I'm sorry, but there's really no skill involved on the female side. You've just got to be willing.

[misombra]

if johnny depp couldn't get it up i would be very sad regardless of whether i was having sex with him or not.

[Asparagoose]

I'd **** the shit out of angelina jolie if she wasn't such a whore and weird.

I don't get what the hype over her is. She's not as attractive as other celebrities. Maybe it's just because of her father and being Hollywood royalty.