ＳＥＸの時、男性が女性の体を触るように女性が男性の体を愛撫ですると気持ちいいですか？
してもらった方が良いですか？
付き合い始めた彼女と初めてのＳＥＸで彼女が積極的すぎると引きますか？
ペニス以外で触られて気持ちいいとこ、してもらうと嬉しい事はなんですか？

＞ペニス以外で触られて気持ちいいとこ

ω

◎◎

俺は、体を触るのがいいけどあまり要らない。
女性の素敵な体を見ことだけでいい。触るも。
男性は、女性の体こそ触るのは、気持ちいいですよ。
君は、AVをちゃんと見れば、すべて明らかになります。

私の彼はアナルに弱いです。電動こけしで付くとアヘアへします。
どっかにあたるそうです。その感覚がたまらないみたいです。
女性にもG-Spotがあるように、男性にもA-Spotがあるそうですね。

(^^)
◎ ◎
I
ω
*

恋バナナ、貴方は超暇人ですなぁ！感心します。どこでも登場して彼女なくさみしいでしょうねぇ〜おさっしします

６に同感します。恋バナナキモイですね。内容キモ　女が一番嫌がるタイプ！

「恋バナナ」に対抗して「腐れバナナ」ってｗｗｗ

7> 　女が一番嫌がるタイプ

それは、女の人によって変りますよ。

僕の以上のレスは、100%本当の男の胸臆です。
もちろん、そんなことは、面と向かって女性に言ってはいけない！

でも、女性は、それを分かるべきですよね。
だからトピお姫に正直に答えました。

トピは「男の人に質問」だから
答えは、男の人からべきだ。

ここには、僕しか男の人が居ない。
レス１，２，４，５などは、十代男の子でしょう。

「愛撫でについて」ってどうしても気になるんですけど。

愛撫で＝あいなで？
愛撫（あいぶ）って読みませんか？

それとも、今はそういう風に言うのでしょうか？


それから、恋バナナさん、
あなたは悪い人じゃないと思いますが、キモイと言われるのは、日本語が変だからだと思います。
頑張っているのはわかりますが、英語で書いたほうがいいのじゃないかな？
書いている内容が悪いのじゃなくて、表現が確かに気持ち悪い（ねっとり系）です。

＞表現が確かに気持ち悪い（ねっとり系）です

バナナが腐ってきてるんでしょうね
真っ黒乞バナナ

＞恋バナナ、女が絶対寝たくない男＞＜貴方恋バナナ！＜名前変えたら〜キモバナナと！！お似合いですよ！どこでも登場！キモバナナ

レス10
＞英語で書いたほうがいいのじゃないか

時々英語で書き込んでいますよ。でも、そうして、何も身に着けません、ね。

There is a risk of being misunderstood, either way, isn't there.

>表現が確かに気持ち悪い

Can you show how to write レス3 with the same content, such that it is not 気持ち悪い？

Thanks.

恋バナナさん、英語も少しおかしいですね。

＞There is a risk of being misunderstood, either way, isn't there.

There is a risk of being misunderstood, either way, isn't there?


＞Can you show how to write レス3 with the same content, such that it is not 気持ち悪い？

Can you show me how to write レス3 with the same content, such that it is not 気持ち悪い？

レス１４さんに、同感します。よくきずいてくれました。ありがとう！恋バナナは、精神的におかしいね。グルメにも色々なところに出てきて、お暇な男、気持ち悪い。

レス14：

Oh, good grief!

Look, buddy. "Isn't there." can be written without a question mark, because it's not a question, okay? It's a rhetorical device like "desu ne". It doesn't sound like a question either: there is no rising pitch at the end. 逆に, the pitch falls.

You don't have to take my word for it. Here an article by someone calling herself Grammar Girl about this topic. You don't have to believe Grammar Girl either, because she gives several references at the bottom.

http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/rhetorical-questions-question-mark.aspx

As for:

"Can you show me how to write ..."

versus:

"Can you show how to write ...",

both are grammatical! "Can you show how to write ..." essentially means show to the world, not to me, personally.

This construction appears often in academic exercises for students, like this:

"Please show that the following polynomial has no real roots."

rather than:

"Please show me that the following polynomial has no real roots."

If you want to attack bad English, you might want to start with easier targets. Go to "英語を話したい", where there are plenty.　Every goddamned scallywag, roustabout and ragamuffin without a proper career in life wants to take money from naive foreigners while putting on a theatrical act in which he portrays himself as a teacher.

(I am on your side when I expose the fraud perpetrated by these ne'er-do-well hucksters and shysters, you know.)

恋バナナ気持ち悪いぞ！！スムージーにして飲んでやる！

＞Look, buddy. "Isn't there." can be written without a question mark, because it's not a question, okay? It's a rhetorical device like "desu ne". It doesn't sound like a question either: there is no rising pitch at the end. 逆に, the pitch falls.

恋バナナさん・・・「because」の前に「,」は不必要ですよ！

＞You don't have to take my word for it. Here an article by someone calling herself Grammar Girl about this topic. You don't have to believe Grammar Girl either, because she gives several references at the bottom.

恋バナナさん・・・「because」の前に「,」は不必要ですよ！

No need to thank me for correcting your English since I'm a nice girl!

＞Every goddamned scallywag, roustabout and ragamuffin without a proper career in life wants to take money from naive foreigners while putting on a theatrical act in which he portrays himself as a teacher.

he portrays himself as a teacher.-> they portray themselves as a teacher. or he/she portrays himself/herself as a teacher.

It's because an English teacher may not be male.

恋バナナさんは英語も日本語もどっちもどっちみたいですね。
私もそうですが・・・私も若い時にこっちに来たので・・・
私は日本語の方が得意ですがね。16歳で来ましたからね。
恋バナナさんは英語の方が得意みたいですね。

レス20：

> he portrays himself as a teacher.-> they portray themselves as a teacher. or he/she portrays himself/herself as a teacher.
>
> It's because an English teacher may not be male.

Dear 20, I use "old school" English where "he" is used.

I don't care that the person may not be male, because I'm not a pinko leftist feminist faggot. Rather, I'm a man.

This business of writing "they" and "he/she" has to do with "political correctness", not with grammar!

Firstly, "he/she" is not word in the English language. If you must write this way, then at least distinguish yourself by using "he or she" and "himself or herself". No slash!

Secondly, "they" is clumsy. This weakens the language. A proper man does not use weak language.

But, never mind that. Why would you be politically correct in a paragraph in which you're calling people hucksters? Think about it! Writing has tone. Usage should be consistent with tone. If the tone of the paragraph is that the writer is an abrasive curmudgeon such as myself, why would he use words which pander to feminist politics?

Anyway, if you use "they", you must take care that you pay attention to whether "they" actually refers to a single person or to a plurality of people.

"They portray themselves as a teacher" only works if "they" actually refers to a single person.

Example: "Some person (I couldn't tell if it was a man or woman) rang my doorbell yesterday, claiming they were a Telus repair person." If I could tell whether it is a man or woman, I would of course use he, or she, as appropriate. It's a specific person, not a representative class.

But in my original paragraph, I am using "he" as a representative of multiple people. If we replace this "he" with "they", it is the normal, plural "they".

Thus, in my paragraph we would need, "they portray themselves as teachers".

Wakarimashitaka?

Koibanana ni mou hantaishinakutte ii yo! <- cute feminine tone, ja nai? :)

Anatano tomodachi da yo.

＞Wakarimashitaka?

そんなことどうでもいいんだよ。

剥きになるとバナナ折れるぞ！

18:
> 恋バナナさん・・・「because」の前に「,」は不必要ですよ！

My friend, the actual rule is not so simple.

First of all, the comma is used, in fact. For instance, take a look at Chapter 5 of Jane Austen's famous novel, _Pride and Prejudice_, electronically available thanks to Project Gutenberg:

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1342/1342-h/1342-h.htm

In chapter five, we have this:

"His pride," said Miss Lucas, "does not offend me so much as pride often does, because there is an excuse for it. One cannot wonder that so very fine a young man, with family, fortune, everything in his favour, should think highly of himself. If I may so express it, he has a right to be proud."

If ", because" is good enough for Jane Austen, it's good enough for me. Most grammarians are worthless academics, compared to Jane Austen, who was a literary giant.

There are situations where ", because" looks bad. And there are situations where the comma affects the meaning. (See below.)

The comma looks bad if "because" heads off a phrase and not a complete clause:

"John was kicked out of school, because of his marijuana smoking." <- ouch, ugly comma!

"John was kicked out of school, because he smoked marijuana." <- acceptable.

Now, there are cases where you have a negative main clause, followed by a reason. The comma then changes the meaning. Please consider these two carefully:

A: "The ceramic casing didn't crack because the temperature was too low."

A: "The ceramic casing didn't crack, because the temperature was too low."

The meaning of A is: "The ceramic casing cracked. The reason why it cracked was not the temperature being too low. The reason was something else."

The meaning of B is: "The ceramic casing did not crack. The reason it did not crack was that the temperature was too low (for that to happen)."

However, the meaning of A is not 100% clear; it has an ambiguous feeling. When we read that, we think: did the writer forget a comma?

If you catch yourself writing this kind of sentence, consider rewriting it like this, for clarity:

"It is not because the temperature was low that the ceramic casing cracked."

However, you might not have to do this because it may be very clear from the context that the casing cracked! If it is known that the casing did crack, then there is only one interpretation for the sentence.

Also, if we are speaking rather than writing, we can use the original sentence, even if the context is not clear, and yet there will not be any ambiguity. Why? Because in speaking, we use word emphasis to influence meaning!

We can use spoken emphasis to create various meanings:

"The casing didn't crack because the *temperature* was too low." (Some parameter was low, and the casing cracked. But that parameter was not temperature)

"The casing didn't crack because the temperature was too *low*." (The casing cracked because of temperature, but not because the temperature was too low. It cracked because the temperature was too high!)

"The *casing* didn't crack because the temperature was too low." (Something cracked because the temperature was too low, but it was not the casing.)

"The casing didn't *crack* because the temperature was too low." (Something happened to the casing because the temperature was too low, but it didn't crack. Maybe it permanently warped.)

＞For instance, take a look at Chapter 5 of Jane Austen's famous novel

恋バナナさ・・・小説参考にしちゃ駄目。大学英語で教わらなかった？

レス25、大学英語は、一年だけ。そんなこと嫌いです。

Canadian universities tend to require students to take a year of English, and I did that.

Although it's a "liberal art", it really should be regarded as a science. Because when you read some story and then write about it, it is actually very precise. A skillful writer uses the pen like a surgical knife. Anything you say about the story is right or wrong, with a precise reference to the text.

It is very important to be able to read, think and write.

This is why, by and large, the respondents in this topic so bitterly disappoint me (though I love all of you so dearly anyway).

I wrote response #3, and all you can do is call me "kimo" and try to attack my grammar. English, of all things! These are just instances of the Ad Hominem fallacy: trying to show that some statement is wrong by attacking the author instead of the subject matter.

Nobody has written a single word addressing the CONTENT of response 3. Why is it kimochiwarui? Which parts of the response evoke that feeling? How so?

だったら小説を参考にグラマーが〜っていうのは×てのは分かってるでしょ。

＞Why is it kimochiwarui? Which parts of the response evoke that feeling? How so?

こういうのはね、どんなに一生懸命勉強しても得られないよ。
日本人独特の感覚・意識っていうのは、勉強しても得られない。
日本に長年住んで慣れしんでも日本語ペラペラになっても得られないもの。
こういうところ、英語とは異なるんだな。

普通の日本人が読んだら、何か違う気味悪い・・と感じるのが自然だよ。

恋バナナさん、
日本語を使いたい、あるいは、日本人と話がしたいというのはわかりました。

が、ご自分で新しいトピをたてたらどうですか？
これ、言葉（日本語、英語）がどうのというトピではないですよね。
あなたは自分の立てたトピでそれをやればいいでしょ。

いっそのこと馬鹿黙さんと同じように新しいカテゴリーを作ってもらって、そこに引っ越してもらいたいです。

そうだね、少しはもう名前が売れたからね。

恋バナナですけど日本語で相手して下さいトピ立てたら？
日本人のアホらしいね根知っこい感覚とか少しは掴めると思う。

みんな、馬鹿恋バナナを相手にしないほうがいいよ！相手をすると馬鹿恋バナナは喜ぶ変体！

＞Dear 20, I use "old school" English where "he" is used.
＞I don't care that the person may not be male, because I'm not a pinko leftist feminist faggot. Rather, I'm a man.

Excuse me? A real man doesn't use a word like faggot. Anyone who uses that kind of word is someone who is not man enough and is not comfortable with their sexuality so they feel like they have to trash talk about others to make themselves feel better! You sure don't know what you're talking about.

Besides, the name like 恋バナナ doesn't sound like a manly name! LOL!

↑32

I regret being goaded into using this word, which is wildly inaccurate, offending where offense is not intended. Indeed, looking at how I expressed myself yesterday makes me cringe, so I am more than sorry.

About whether I'm comfortable with my sexuality, that is neither here nor there, is it? You like taking things to a personal level, it seems, but okay, I don't mind.

To be frank, I've never met anyone who was comfortable with their sexuality, so I never had a role model in that area. What does it even mean to be comfortable with your sexuality?

To begin with, how can you be comfortable with some uncontrollable drive that causes you to look at every skirt that walks by, all your life. It's ridiculous. It's wildly out of proportion to how many partners you will have in life, and how many children.

We should develop some kind of medical procedure which eliminates the desire, but doesn't change the other attributes of a man, such as his identity as a man, his drive for success, or his thrill in taking risks, his leadership, his instinct to protect those who are weaker, and all of that.

How about sexualy and aging? You just wait until you are old, and still have some desire, while your body is too disgusting even for you to look at yourself. We will see how comfortable you are with your sexuality.

See how comfortable you are if someone says some hurtful words to you during sex, which you will remember every time you have a sexual feeling from that moment on. Or if you are ever used for sex, or, heaven forbid, assaulted.

As for me, what I might say is that I'm comfortable with my current level of discomfort about my sexuality. I had very little discomfort as a teen (very lucky!) but since then there has been a slow, but relentless upward trend in discomfort, I would say.

恋バナナ doesn't sound like a manly name, because it isn't. It's just a wacky name, for laughs. Take 恋話、add one more　な. No brainer. :) Did you just LOL, there? See, it's working.

In 33 above, "sexualy and aging" is a typo which was supposed to be "sexuality and aging".

＞I regret being goaded into using this word, which is wildly inaccurate, offending where offense is not intended. Indeed, looking at how I expressed myself yesterday makes me cringe, so I am more than sorry.

I now think you are very manly! :-)
It takes a lot of guts to admit your mistake and say you're sorry.
恋バナナさんは話が長いけど、悪い人ではなさそうですね。

でもさ、JPの趣旨分かってないよね。

まじめに返しちゃつまらんぞ、乞いバナナ。。
吊られてることに気付いてないのかなぁ・・