First, regarding the lj posts... I friended you and am now responding. I hope to get to know you better.
Thank you and likewise.
Do you take my post less seriously or in some negative light because I am taking the time to post? People love to get responses.
Of course not. I'm asking not from a poster stand point, but from a commenter stand point. That is, if someone posts something publicly, I assume they want anyone who wants to to comment, and I assume they like getting responses. However the poster feels about it, though, I rarely feel comfortable replying if the post is of a personal nature. Sometimes I want to reply, but I am very shy. I can't help but feel nervous about it, even if logically, I know the person would welcome a response.
When the actor for Whistler (who was introduced in Buffy so he could take Angel to LA) backed out of the show, they created a whole new demon to be Angel's link to the higher powers.
!!! I didn't know this. I always wondered why they didn't do more with Whistler, and always thought he would've made more sense as Angel's link than Doyle. I didn't know that they had problems with the actor. It's too bad, because Doyle felt forced to me, too.
Granted, I prefer to see something rather than a pan shot moving from the bed to the window (quote: The Truman Show)
That's a great quote. Because they did that in Reprise, and it annoyed me. Not that they could show anything, but still.
Yes, males can easily become erect while giving blood (Quote Xander: Can get turned on by thinking of linoleum).
Still, it's not the "how can one get turned on by that" question that bothers me. I know that people (both men and women) can get turned on by random, puzzling, and painful things. But since blood is required for an erection, the physical aspects of it interests me. It would seem to me that even if a guy was aroused by it, maintaining an erection might be difficult. Then again, I guess the answer is "that much less blood goes to work the brain."
no subject
Thank you and likewise.
Do you take my post less seriously or in some negative light because I am taking the time to post? People love to get responses.
Of course not. I'm asking not from a poster stand point, but from a commenter stand point. That is, if someone posts something publicly, I assume they want anyone who wants to to comment, and I assume they like getting responses. However the poster feels about it, though, I rarely feel comfortable replying if the post is of a personal nature. Sometimes I want to reply, but I am very shy. I can't help but feel nervous about it, even if logically, I know the person would welcome a response.
When the actor for Whistler (who was introduced in Buffy so he could take Angel to LA) backed out of the show, they created a whole new demon to be Angel's link to the higher powers.
!!! I didn't know this. I always wondered why they didn't do more with Whistler, and always thought he would've made more sense as Angel's link than Doyle. I didn't know that they had problems with the actor. It's too bad, because Doyle felt forced to me, too.
Granted, I prefer to see something rather than a pan shot moving from the bed to the window (quote: The Truman Show)
That's a great quote. Because they did that in Reprise, and it annoyed me. Not that they could show anything, but still.
Yes, males can easily become erect while giving blood (Quote Xander: Can get turned on by thinking of linoleum).
Still, it's not the "how can one get turned on by that" question that bothers me. I know that people (both men and women) can get turned on by random, puzzling, and painful things. But since blood is required for an erection, the physical aspects of it interests me. It would seem to me that even if a guy was aroused by it, maintaining an erection might be difficult. Then again, I guess the answer is "that much less blood goes to work the brain."