>>> The point, in _My_ humble opinion, is not so much about entering (engaging) a relationship, but about continuing, strengthening it. You might, exempli gratia, start out just with the desire to get the black bimbo laid (reverse roles, in your case), and might end up with a severe (and, gladly, near-incurable :-) case of Eternal Love. <<<

<-Inquisitor->,

I've heard of the metaphor of a donkey used to describe something similar to what you are suggesting, but in the context of a learner's approach to a mystical tradition. The metaphor goes that you may use a donkey to arrive at the tradition's doorstep (the donkey being highly motivating attitudes or habits, such as greed, that may get you to a place where you can learn something but are no longer appropriate even counterproductive, once you reach your destination). Once there, a different approach is required. You have to dismount to enter the door. In a relationship that begins with an attraction based on looks, I suppose a similar dismount, or change of travel mode, is eventually needed if it is to survive.

Yep, I am back on a.s.b., for better or for worse, but don't worry, unlike the Georgia legislature when it comes to town, you don't have to hide your wives or your daughters around me (unless they happen to be cute butch femdoms, of course!)

You were right, I do address the continuation of a relationship aspect in my second question to Ivan, but I would like to say a little bit more about it here. First of all, a question for you: while it would be ideal if one's one-night stand with the bimbo (what's the male version? bimbom? Or bimDom, on this newsgroup?) turned into a lasting, loving relationship, don't you think that the odds are much more likely that if a person selected a sexual partner solely on the basis of his or her physical appeal, that the chances that the rest of the relationship will work out are pretty low? In my opinion it's not too likely, but I agree with you that converting such an inauspicious beginning into a case of Eternal Love is an ideal to strive for, if you think that your gorgeous cupcake might have what you need intellectually, emotionally, etc. But, whew! It's hard enough to find someone compatible when you _aren't_ focused on looks and are looking solely at personality. Think of how long it might take to find the ideal partner, if you were selecting only from among the tiny percentage of the population that you thought were physical knockouts . Then, if you're like most of the people reading this newsgroup, you have to limit the population even more to kinky knockouts!

Although I think it can be potentially dangerous to one's happiness and future mental health to let looks interfere with the selection of one's lifemate, I wonder if the same can be true about other traits that people often screen for. Take intelligence, for instance. I've always screened potential friends and lovers for this desirable trait, but sometimes I wonder if I could have been content with someone significantly less intelligent than I if they had everything else I was looking for. The obvious answer is of course not, but sometimes when I am contentedly subbing to my little pet kitten (who perhaps only seems to be much less intelligent than I--g), I wonder just how important even something basic like intelligence really is when it comes to the ultimate compatibility (a.k.a. Eternal Love) between two beings.

I'm sorry to say that I missed Hound Dog's "Ditzy Blond" post, in both incarnations. Can you give me the gist of it, or was it something you just had to be there for?

I'm not in the Scene in the sense of public play or display, so I can't say that I've been around enough to notice "the envy factor" at work. The S&M people that I've run into in non-play circumstances have seemed refreshingly unconcerned with others' looks, but again, I might have been blind to this aspect because I wasn't really looking for it. I think the closest thing to "lookism" in the Scene that I've experienced is the occasional encounter with the stand-and-model type at a bustling public club whom everyone gawks at when they strut by. You better believe I stand there and gawk too, but this image-from-an-SM-fashion -spread-come-to-life has no connection to me personally, so I don't feel much of an envy factor, nor a desire to meet them, nor much of anything else, besides a distant artistic appreciation for the look, I suppose.

Back to the Eternal Love theme for a minute. Part of what I was trying to get at with my second question to Ivan was that if person A genuinely loves knockout b, but the two initially got together primarily because of knockout B's looks, will person A no longer love knockout B (or love them differently...or less?) if knockout B loses his or her looks? Person A will no longer have the "smug satisfaction" of having the best looking partner in the room (it's so bizarre trying to talk about this, having never felt that particular emotion myself or even a desire to experience it--but I think I get close when I imagine Donald losing his mental abilites) or any of the other rewards that go with having a good-looking partner. When the reason for the relationship coming into being in the first place is suddenly gone, does the relationship crumble or does it florish on, oblivious to that fact? Naturally the answer has to do with the two individuals involved and what they've built between them since the initial attraction, but just what are the personal traits and outside circumstances that conspire to form a lasting bond?

Yeah, I know this is a tough question .