For a one-time deal, I’d go with beautiful. Over a period of time, kinky.
But of course it is hard to say for certain. For this to be fair I’m assuming the (very) beautiful test subject is prudish, and the other girl just unattractive but otherwise my type. I don’t think I could have sex with a truly ugly woman, no matter how many flavors came with it.
I’ll have to go with the “depends on what you mean by not kinky” crowd. If she won’t indulge my “school marm and naughty cowboy” fantasy, or try to see how fast we can burn through the Karma Sutra, well, I can do without.
If she won’t do any of the mainstram positions except missionary, or won’t do oral (giving or recieving), or simply won’t have sex very often if at all, then that’s another story.
Have to disagree with that. Beauty fades and tires. Lines, wrinkles, sagging, bagging…happens to the best of us, unless there’s surgery involved. Kinky, on the other hand, depending I guess on what kind of kinky you’re talking about, generally denotes passion and heat that pervades other areas of a person and can be felt, not just seen. When you’ve looked at someone for a number of years, they are more often than not seen for what they are inside and what they bring out in you. I would consider myself more kinky/passionate than beautiful and have had no problems maintaining long-term relationships. Of course that’s easy when I’ve got them tied up.
Kinky. I dated a Swedish hottie for awhile…boring boring boring. But boy did she turn heads when we’d walk into a room! She didn’t use sex as a weapon, nor deny me or anything like that, she was just boring. She lay there like a sack of mashed potatoes. I think she believed that she could rely on her looks and not do anything. Actually, she was kinky in one aspect- she liked the taste of semen. But she never really helped me get to that point. Weird.