...for a different kind of girl

silent surburban girl releasing her voice, not yet knowing what all she wants to say about her life and the things that make it spin. do you have to be 18 to be here? you'll know when i know.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

there is no 'i' in 'team'

if you've been reading me for a few months or even few hours, you may know by now that i associate with some diverse characters. i hate to use this made-up term for my girlfriends, but i think "semi-prudish" may be accurate. one of my best friends can't say the word "penis" and another freaks when she discovers i got naked for my first massage experience. so i thought it was entirely accurate.

but after a weekend with my girlfriends, i've concluded that i may have to rethink that whole "semi-prudish" description.

let me set the scene for you - saturday night in a nondescript, none too classy suburban metro hotel. three girls and several empty wine cooler bottles (don't ask. it wasn't my choice!) are all now prone around the room. talk, as it's wont to do, turns to sex (i told you. we can't get together without someone bringing it up). we've dissected the topic of simultaneous orgasms and faked orgasms (guess which one happens more than the other...). the tally of who initiates sex more often is winding down when suddenly, "ms. ach! you got naked!" bursts forth with the following:

"you know, don't you, that when we were in college, she and i had a threesome with him, right?"

were we conducting a train, you would have heard it coming to a screeching halt on the tracks to avoid hitting the giant thought bubble screaming "tell us more!" that was stalled there.

(to fill in the mad libs here, "she" is one of our other best girlfriends not in attendance last weekend and "he" is the then-boyfriend and soon to be ex-husband of the girl who dropped this potential penthouse nugget on us).

"well, i probably should say we had a threesome, but we weren't all doing stuff with each other at the same time," my forthcoming friend added quickly.

"um...wait a minute right there," i countered. "i'm not skilled in the friendly art of threesomes, but at what point does it cease becoming a threesome if you're not all dipping into the punch bowl at the same time?"

seriously. think about it. a team relies on each player to be successful on the court or the field. a quartet isn't a quartet if the bass player decides he's going to hang around and look at the cute chicks crowding the stage while the other three band members pick up the slack. can this experience my friend had while in college truly be classified a threesome?

because i love to dissect an experience with my friends with those of our group who can't be in attendance, i immediately called our token guy friend sunday afternoon when the girls disbanded to relay this information to him. after we did our customary "can you imagine?" and "who do you think brought it up in the first place?" dissection, this dear man concluded the following:

"honey, i wouldn't even have called this a threesome. this sounds like a classic case of voyeurism!"

"well, then," i teased. "wait until i tell you what she and 'not as prudish as she painted herself to be, voyeurism is fun' friend did together when it was just the two of them..."


Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK this sounds a bit strange. A strange way to relate to the historical acts in the present day.

Highly interesting and erotic though.

Your friends are an interesting bunch. I can see why you hang out with them.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:55:00 AM  
Blogger Ben said...

In college, it's more a case of kids being kids I think. Shit's always going down in one way or another.

Besides, I'm firmly convinced it's natural for girls to experiment. Women are sensual.

Men are just dongs.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:34:00 AM  
Blogger The Savage said...

All I heard was blah blah blah... soon to be ex-husband .... So.. one of your friends is gonna be single soon eh?...

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 3:23:00 AM  
Blogger Nanette said...

Um...mutual orgasms? ;)

I'm with the voyeurism call--it's a good one.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 4:41:00 AM  
Blogger Edtime Stories said...

so often when I read your writing I hate to comment as it seems so unnecessary. This was brilliant.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:28:00 AM  
Blogger Biscuit said...

You need to hang out with me and my friends. Just sayin'.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:31:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well now you have blown my ability to concentrate for the rest of the day. Thanks ;)

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:58:00 AM  
Blogger Cherrie said...

Interesting question! I would say a "threesome" is whenever three people get together to have sex. They don't all three have to have sex with each other at the same time. You could have rotating coupling with the third person lending a hand, tongue or pair of lips, or just sitting back and enjoying the show.

But if three people are together and only two of them have sex, that's voyeurism.

So I would classify the experience of your sexually-conflicted friend as a threesome. As if it matters, really. Did the three of them enjoy the experience? That's all that counts, whatever it was.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007 7:42:00 PM  
Blogger for a different kind of girl said...

lbp - trust me. these people i associate with are hardcore. hardcore subtle. you never know when something will slip out in conversation.

nocturnal - college was a free for all. for some of us, anyway. but god bless men all the same! as for massage pictures? i'd never have gotten my quality 90 minutes if i'd pulled out the cell phone and tried to capture a few. bummer.

savage - as much as i'd love the idea of having you fall into our little mix of friends (so i could dwell secretly on you, of course) it pains me to tell you that you are (A) not young enoug and (B) the wrong race for my friend. she's hardcore in her preferences.

nanette - thanks for serving as my editor! i knew when i typed it and re-read it after it posted, something about it didn't sound right! my previous editor has given up on me. thanks for stepping up when necessary!

ed - you keep up that kind of talk and i'll start blushing. chaos will ensue. but thanks!

biscuit - now that i know your summer plans, i could try to swing such a thing! it sounds most interseting in a veiled kind of way!

finished - hope you at least got something off your 'to do' list today!

cherrie - truly, from what was told, it was as though one browsed a magazine or flipped the tv stations while the other parties played! but they were intrigued enough by the idea that they did dabble a bit together a couple years later.

Thursday, February 08, 2007 1:09:00 AM  
Blogger FTN said...

As long as we are applying for the editor job, I should say that in the third paragraph, I assume you meant "none-TOO-classy."

Don't you just hate the grammar and spelling police?

I'm not up on the rules and regulations of threesomes. But I highly doubt the guy was complaining, either way.

Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:26:00 AM  
Blogger for a different kind of girl said...

ftn - you've come back to check to see if i've corrected the mistake you pointed out to me, haven't you? admit it. you simply can't get enough. like those old ladies who would anonymously mail copies of the newspaper to me when there was errors in it. how'd i know they were old ladies, you ask? old lady smell and wobbly handwriting when they lambasted me.

yes...i've done the "fried children" mistake in a lunch menu...oddly, that didn't get caught by the masses or late night talk show hosts.

finally, maybe there should be a rule book on these things (threesomes. i already have an ap stylebook). goodness knows there's a book for everything else.

...here's me leaving now, paranoid of future mistakes...

Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:57:00 PM  
Blogger for a different kind of girl said...

yeah...i know there's a mistake in my reply...sigh...

Thursday, February 08, 2007 4:58:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home