subway makes bad cookies.

i had a nice evening. i had a glass wine and it made me a little tipsy. i sat and watched most of a very interesting documentary and then i watched this movie called "A ma soeur! (fat girl)" and truthfully, it was pretty boring. just because it's french and there's full-frontal male nudity doesn't make it good.

but that's not what i want to talk about. i want to talk about something IN the movie. usually i save what i'm about to talk about for i masturbate but i'm more curious about this than aroused by it...

so i was watching that "fat girl" movie (irrelevant title by the way) and the fat girl's sister meets this italian boy whom she falls head over heels in love with in about 2.4 seconds. trouble is she's a version and he's older and pushy. she's not willing to have sex with him just yet-on moral grounds-but he somehow manages to convince her that having anal sex isn't the same as 'regular' sex and 'taking in the back' isn't losing your virginity.

cue sister trying to sleep in the same room but having difficulty due to the obviously in pain sister screaming in the bed across the room.

thinking back to losing my virginity (which truthfully, didn't hurt a bit) i can't imagine having anal sex before vaginal sex. i can't imagine anyone convincing me that anal sex wasn't a moral issue if, to me, vaginal sex was.

boys, is this a commonly used line if a girl's unwilling to 'give it up' as readily as you'd like? does this fall into the same catagory as "look how hot you make me baby, you don't want me to have to get myself off do you. that would be gross" or "it hurts too much. i'll get blue balls!"

curious.

anyways, i know it's just a movie and all but you think this girl would have known that anal sex-when you're feeling pressured especially- can be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more painful than vaginal sex...

discuss.