bostonman

Anal sex is something straight couples do as well, you know. It's not just something gay men do. I don't know what percentage of straight couples tend to do it, but I think you'd be surprised.

I didn't. I'm not really interested in that, even with men. (I confess, I'm just not an "ass man" lol.) I might consider trying vaginal intercourse at some point, but to be honest, I'd be much more into trying cunnilingus again, maybe with a different FTM who would be more into giving me some friendly, fun guidance, and helping me get really good at it (unless I already am, lol).

Ok - I'll volunteer. (I'm not going to name the escort as I think that would put this too much in the review category. But I do want to describe the experience. I hope this is kosher for the site.) Background - though I've always pretty much identified as gay, I did date a few girls in college, though we never went all the way. I'm a very oral-oriented guy, and one thing I've always been curious about is going down on a woman. But I've never gotten up the nerve to find a woman to hook up with for that purpose. Actually, I've always thought what I'd really love to do would be to meet with a M/F couple, and having him demonstrate and coach me - but also because having the male presence in the room with me would be both a turn-on and a comfort. So, as the presence of FTM's have become more prominent, I figured this might be a good way of experiencing both in one person. The escort I hired was very handsome, boyish, friendly, and happy to help me fulfill my desires. After some making out, etc, - and I'll refer to him in male pronouns for now - he stripped down and let me have my first real intimate look at a "front hole" as it were. I have to say that I was much more turned on than I even expected to be. He showed me how to finger him, which I enjoyed doing, and then encouraged me to use my tongue. His only provision was that he said he didn't orgasm easily, and wouldn't fake it, lol. But he let me go at it for a good long time, and seemed to be enjoying it. I would have liked more guidance, to know for sure that I was doing it right, but given that he let me keep going, I have to assume I was doing ok. So yes - it was intensely erotic for me, though I would have found it moreso with more involvement from him. (Though I don't mean to make it sound like he wasn't involved - he was - just not as much as I would have liked.) Would I do it again? I think so. And I would definitely say that, as I expected, part of the fun of the experience for me was that to me he was very much a "guy," just with female genitalia. I liked the male/male dynamic but with the ability to explore a different part of the anatomy. I hope that helps.

I can't imagine having sex with any character from "The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe."

Indeed, just afternoons, and only some Sundays. And when there is a Sunday matinee, Monday will be dark. It's really not such a bad idea - except that it does make the weekend more challenging for crew and staff, as well as the orchestra, and possibly chorus (depending on which operas are being performed). Right now the toughest part of the week is the sequence of Friday night, Saturday matinee, Saturday evening, because of the proximity of the performances as compared to the rest of the week. Adding a Sunday matinee (as opposed to evening) makes for the 4th show in a 48 hour span. Although this kind of schedule is standard on Broadway and regional theatre, etc, the technical resets between performances of the same show doesn't compare to having to mount 4 completely different operas in that time span. I wish them luck...

Ooh - there was something very creepy about that dude (was that even a dude?)

That Julia Child sketch may indeed be the greatest. "Save the liver" indeed. But then there was that commercial parody for "Shimmer" - a floor wax AND a dessert topping. I can only find an audio version of the skit - here 'tis.

Even better - it would be great if "page size" (i.e. the number of ads per page) was adjustable, so that I wouldn't have to scroll through a set bunch of pages to browse the ads.

It is a subject for another thread - but just to say that for most musical revivals these days, that's exactly what happens.

It may depend on what the Roundabout’s take on “Kate” will be. If they plan to resurrect the lame rewrite which was the last revival (1999), Cole Porter will lose.

Because it's a quintessential variation on the "backstage" story - just like Kiss Me, Kate, which is also seeing a production this coming season at the Roundabout. In the case of Kate, it's about the ironic parallels between the stage and real life as both collide - in the case of Tootsie, it's the struggle to keep the two aspects separate and secret. I have been a fan of composer David Yazbek since the Tonys snubbed his fantastic work on The Full Monty - now that The Band's Visit has finally gotten him that award, I tend to think this show will be of that much more interest - and I think that in particular, his zany/quirky comic musical style will be a perfect fit for this story. That's why.

Yes, but the way dates are listed can often be very confusing. Sometimes it lists the escort being in 2 places at once (currently), sometimes a few future cities are listed all with the same dates, or overlapping dates, etc. I wish they'd have a system that spelled this all out better. Along with that, there are escorts that will advertise that they are willing to travel to a certain city, but they clearly have no scheduled plans to do so. But it's often hard to distinguish at first (i.e. without clicking on the ad itself) that this is the case. I think all those little suitcase icons, etc, should go away, to be replaced with something that actually means what it means.

I had a chance to have a nice conversation with one of my new freshmen in my college musical theatre program yesterday. The Band's Visit came up and we were both talking about how much we love the score. I asked if she know about the new Yazbek musical now in tryouts, and she didn't. When I mentioned it was Tootsie, based on the film, I got a blank stare. She's never heard of it. I feel old, lol. Looking forward to seeing how this develops, though - especially as a big Yazbek fan.

Lane is always entertaining, but I tend to feel like he's always playing himself. He's very funny, though I feel like he often plays for laughs a bit too much. Martin, on the other hand, is one of the most inventive and honestly hilarious actresses I can think of. This should be fun.

It's also interesting that Hair, while it was clearly the best show of its genre at the time, is the one that tends to get remembered for its nudity, when it really didn't have much, especially compared to shows like Oh Calcutta and Let My People Come. The famous (or infamous?) "nude scene" was really nothing more than a quick reveal at the end of Act I, in the last section of the song "Where Do I Go." (And it was always optional for each cast member, from day one.) I saw Hair in a 1990's national tour (having no idea that a colleague of mine was playing the "Margaret Mead" track - fun surprise), that included some joke-y voice-overs at the start of Act II, including a man saying something like "honey, we saw the nude scene - can't we go home now?" (Hair did have a huge amount of sexual frankness, of course - but also a lot about drugs, racial tensions, and of course most importantly Vietnam, the draft, and the hippie world in general. But somehow it still gets remembered as being "the nude show" lol.) I've heard the cast recording of Let My People Come. I'd say that its "appeals" are similar to the score of Naked Boys Singing, in the sense that these shows do tend to lose quite a bit without the visuals lol. Still, the "shock value" of the songs in Let My People Come must have been especially fun when it played in the 70's.

Ostensibly so that they can't reach you. (I have one escort in Boston blocked for that reason - because he's kept trying to contact me and I want nothing to do with him. But yeah, I still see his ad every time I look through the list, and I agree that's idiotic.)

Like any producer, Davenport has had his hits and misses. While this show is closing, he still has Kinky Boots and Once On This Island. He also produced the critically acclaimed recent revival of Spring Awakening. But the Times article quoted above sounds about right to me - that this was a "passion project" for Mr. Davenport. Now, "passion projects" can be wonderful, but they can also mean that you're so close to the piece that you can't see how to properly make it as exciting for the audience. In other word, "passion project" really means "vanity project." So much so, that I understand he gave a big curtain speech before the show each night. Instant turn-off for me. Get off the stage, Mr. Producer...let the actors handle that part. And gee - a producer who can't handle the slings and arrows of a critic's sometimes truly poison pen? I think the Davenport doth protest too much...

...which gave us the Feast Of Stephen.

I always figured that went back to Adam eating of the forbidden fruit...

Lady Day Style Dating is when it Ain't Nobody's Business who your date is. Circumcision Style Dating is when your partner is a real cut-up. The first two notes of "Chestnuts Roasting On An Open Fire" is the Octave Of Christmas. The earliest Christians (who were Jews, of course) gave up on circumcision because they found that the Gentiles they were trying to convert were just a teeny little bit squeamish about the ritual - so they came up with the idea that you didn't have to convert to Judaism to then become Christian. In lieu of self-mutilation, they had to agree to eat fish on Fridays.

And this has nothing to do with the shoes. But no, an actor doesn't get any guaranteed revenue from a prop or costume piece.

The Kennedy Center cast looks awesome - particularly with Lee Wilkof returning to the show as Mushnik.

Benjamin - any specifics on how you feel it breaks new ground? (Save the way Audrey II is played, which may have been done before.) I still have fond memories of the original production in Boston in the mid 1980's, a sit-down "offshoot" of the NYC original. It played at the wonderful Charles Playhouse, which has a long and vibrant history of both local productions and small-scale tours/sitdowns - which unfortunately has all been given up now, as it's the permanent Boston home of Blue Man Group. But, the reason I bring that up is that the Audrey in that production was played by a young, then unknown Carolee Carmello. The cast was uniformly great, but there was something about Carmello that even then, made you sit up and notice. She still may not be a household name after all these years, but theatre people certainly know who she is - and I feel lucky to have seen her so early on. Such a great show in general. And it really introduced us all to Menken and Ashman - we'd of course lose Ashman all too soon after that, but Menken has gone on to have an amazing career. But there's still something absolutely genius about Little Shop.

I miss Court TV, which is what "Tru" TV used to be. Tru?

"According to IMDb, the story is based on Disneyland’s theme park ride (with the same name). On the ride, a small riverboat takes a group of travelers through a jungle filled with dangerous animals and reptiles. But something magical happens..." ...a stereotypically gay character pops up. Magic!! (Come on, Disney, it's 2018...)