Message-ID: <1888eli$9707031020@qz.little-neck.ny.us> X-Archived-At: From: Celeste801@aol.com Subject: REPOST: Celestial Reviews 194 - June 28 Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.d,alt.sex.stories.moderated,alt.sex.stories Followup-To: alt.sex.stories.d Path: qz!not-for-mail Organization: The Committee To Thwart Spam Approved: X-Moderator-Contact: Eli the Bearded X-Story-Submission: X-Original-Message-ID: <970703092443_290105762@emout08.mail.aol.com> X-Is-Review: yes Celestial Reviews 194 - June 28, 1997 Note: What is this world coming to? In CR 191 I used the term "animal magnitude." I obviously meant "animal magnetism." Hello! Is anybody home? Usually I get a bag of fan male and Grammaticus writes me a poem when I make a gaff like that. Doesn't anyone love me anymore? Second note: Don't bother writing. I know how to spell fan mail. I just thought "fan male" was an interesting concept and might get your attention in that context. Third note: In the past my free proofreading service has been quite helpful to some authors. However, many of the e-mail addresses in my file are out of date. If you are still interested in helping out by reading and commenting on stories before authors post them, please contact me and give me your current e-mail address. I promise not to do anything improper with this information. Fourth note: What ARE some good ways to post anonymously nowadays. People ask me this question, and I honestly don't know the answer. An advantage of AOL is that we are allowed five screen names, and I assure my privacy by using Celeste801 for my Celestial Reviews and another for more mundane activities. If someone sends me information on how to post anonymously, I'll share it. Fifth note: I once criticized the THC Archives for posting mediocre stories. Maybe it's my imagination, but I think they have gotten better lately. I think what really may be happening is that Tommy is reposting both his same old stuff plus some new stuff, and the stories he has more recently added - which include some of the ones that I've been reviewing - are generally better. Anyway, I discovered that Tommy is selling a CD-ROM with lots of stories on it for $19.95. I mention this not to advertise his service, but to pose a problem. Is it OK for a person or company to make a profit off the stories of other people, when the original authors will receive no compensation? I know of one very good author who decided to stop posting stories here when she discovered that the Backdrop Club was offering similar sets of stories (including some of her own) for sale. Please do not crap on me for the following opinion. I do not sell anyone's stories, and I do not intend to start doing so. I merely think there is an issue that needs to be discussed, and this note may be the best forum to start that discussion. My personal feeling is that it does NOT bother me that someone would offer this service. Here are my reasons: (1) $19.95 is not an exorbitant price for a CD-ROM. I doubt that Tommy can quit his day job and sell these stories instead. I think it is legitimate to say that he is selling the SERVICE of bringing the stories together, rather than accepting a royalty for something he has published. However, I am also aware that American courts would not accept this explanation if he performed this "service" by putting the works of Danielle Steele and John Updike on CE-ROM. (2) If Tommy sells 10,000 stories for $19.95 and divided the profits among himself and the authors, the royalties to individual authors would be negligible, even if he sold lots of copies and found a feasible way to distribute these royalties. (3) I think what Tommy is doing is different than publishing the stories in a magazine. If, say, Penthouse or Playboy posted my reviews without paying me, I'd sue them and win. (4) I think Tommy himself is running a risk by trying to sell these stories. I am not a lawyer, nor am I married to one (as you can easily ascertain from the fact that I have a happy sex life with a normal human being), nor do I even play a lawyer on TV; but it seems to me that if an author sued Tommy for selling stories that he/she had copyrighted, that person would win the lawsuit. The difference between Tommy and Penthouse is that Penthouse makes enough money to be worth suing, whereas Tommy does not. If Tommy ever becomes successful, he had better watch his ass: the people whose stories he is selling know where he lives. (5) What I do object to is that Tommy often reposts stories that (a) have the author's name removed or (b) are first or second chapters of multi-part stories for which the later chapters cannot be located. I doubt that Tommy actually removes the names of the authors - and in fact I have noticed a trend with his more recent reposts to preserve the names; but I think it is essential to give credit to the authors whenever this is possible. If others have comments, I would be happy to summarize them to some extent in future issues of CR, or you can continue this discussion amongst the spam on a.s.s.d. Final note: Remember: even though someone else may be posting my reviews for me, my e-mail address is still Celeste801@aol.com. - Celeste "Wet T-Shirt Contest" by Mike Hunt (elevator and phone sex) 10, 10, 10 "Number Four" by Jake (femdom) 10, 9, 8 "Between the Races" by Radioman (interracial sex) 10, 10, 10 "Miss-Placed" by Stephanie (futuristic TG sex in the Wild West) 10, 10, 10 Guest Reviews: "Exchange Program" by Clint Quinn (sci fi sex) 10, 10, 10 "The Other Side" by Unknown Author (wife watching) 10, 7, 8 "Goldilocks" by Robert Mitchell (fairy tale sex) 10, 10, 10 Reposted Reviews (because the stories have recently been reposted): * "Not Really Cheating" by Dave Schulte (mutual masturbation) 10, 10, 10 * "Lynn" by Dirty Dawg (romance) 10, 10, 10 * "Once You're Rubbed" by Amy (Romance) 10, 8, 8 * "Once You're Rubbed by Amy" by Backrub (Romance) 10, 10, 10 "Wet T-Shirt Contest" by Mike Hunt (MrMike@aol.com). There are some things that people just don't really think about. For example, the guy that pours the water on the young ladies in a wet T-shirt contest has a hard job. Not only is it hard, it's also difficult. He has to wet down the right parts and only those parts of the contestants. This requires technique. This requires savoir faire. Which reminds me. Mike Hunt gets really pissed when my reviews are funnier or sexier or more literate or all of the preceding than his stories. I'll try to stop that, but it may be hard. Nevertheless, since I've used a hard word - I mean a difficult or unusual phrase - I think I had better explain what "savoir faire" means. My dictionary defines the concept as "knowing just what to do in any situation; tact." That defintion doesn't do the term justice. I can do better with a series of examples: If a Frenchman comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man and says, 'Pardonnez moi!' that is ALMOST savoir faire. If the same Frenchman instead says, 'Pardonnez moi. Continuez, s'il vous plait!' that's EVEN CLOSER to savoir faire. But if the Frenchman says, 'Pardonnez moi. Continuez, s'il vous plait!' and then the other man - if he continuez, that IS savoir faire! Anyway, savoire faire and gaucherie aside, Mike Hunt was assigned the responsibility of wetting the T-shirts during the contest, and he was working hard while he performed his chores. I have a friend who used to be a priest. He once told me that he used to put ice cubes into the baptismal water, because then the baby would yell out in shock at the actual moment of baptism, and this would make it sound like the devil was indisputably going out of the child. Symbolism is wonderful. Mike Hunt likewise used ice cubes in his water during the contest, also to bring out the devil, so to speak. Cold tits are rich in symbolism. Mike Hunt found that his job was easier if the girls cooperated. For example, if they stuck their chests way forward, then it was easier to keep the water on their tits where it belonged, rather than on their hair or the floor. Big problem. Contestant Number 3, a major character in this story, was Francis from Phoenix, AZ. I guess people can spell their own names anyway they want; but unless this is a TG story, Number 3 was probably Frances. Sometimes people named Francis call themselves Fanny. That name is in the punchline of a joke about St. Peter and ladies applying for heaven, which was told to me by the priest with ice cubes to whom I referred earlier in this review. Well, as time went on, Mike Hunt got better and better at his job - I suppose because he was working harder and harder. He became really great at tit-watering. His main job during the contest was to bait the crowd, and he quickly became a master at this task. There may already be even more puns in this review than there are in the story itself, and so I'll let you complete this one about being a master at baiting. So you may think this is a story about strippers and voyeurism and such. But it's not! It's mostly a combination elevator-sex and phone-sex story. That's right. After the contest Mike Hunt gets stuck on a crowded elevator with Francis, and the elevator gets stuck between floors, and Francis's fanny (see above) gets stuck into Mike Hunt, and.... Never mind, you can read the story yourself. I'll just tell you the other joke. So these three women have died and have arrived before the gates of heaven, where St. Peter interviews them. {Peter could actually be a funny name in this story, because some people refer to a dick as a peter, but that's not relevant to this joke; so just assume that Peter is really the name of the "person" who keeps a book of good and bad deeds at the gate of heaven. Q. Who keeps the book at the Gate of Heaven? A. No. What is the name of the person who keeps the book at the Gate of Heaven. Who is seated at the right hand of God. For more of this nonsense, read my story "Virtuous Reality," which includes an interview with Madonna and which I recently reposted on a.s.s. and a.s.s.m.} Anyway, the first lady comes forward and St. Peter says to her, "You were so selfish and avaricious that you were named Penny. Depart to hell for all eternity." To the second lady St. Peter says, "You were such an excessive and immoderate drinker of wine that you were named Sherry. Depart to hell for all eternity." The third woman just walks away. St. Peter says, "Where are you going?" She replies, "Why bother? My name is Fanny." Ratings for "Wet T-Shirt Contest" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Smith (appeal to reviewer): 10 "Number Four" by Jake (THC Archives). This is a short but clearly-written story about a man who takes a submissive position and waits for his mistress to come home and use him as a sextoy. She brings a friend, and they use him briefly but well. I am not a bdsm enthusiast, and one of the criteria by which I evaluate such stories is whether it conveys any emotion to me as an outsider. This one may be effective for insiders (bdsm aficionados), but it really didn't do much for me. Ratings for "Number Four" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 9 Smith (appeal to reviewer): 8 "Between the Races" by Radioman. Jerry gets dragged off to an art show by a friend. He doesn't really understand art; but he meets an artist named Maleeka at the show, and they develop and intense and immediate attraction to each other. I have this egalitarian quirk that makes me think that people should respect members of other races and treat them as equals. A lot of the stories that are labeled "interracial" are not very egalitarian at all. Usually there is a black guy with a monster cock and a white woman who craves to be satisfied by this animal. They're not all that bad, but I can often almost see the author leering at me through the lines of the story. This one is different. Jerry obviously gets off on the notion that this lady is black, but it's not as if blackness is an oddity of some sort. Likewise, Maleeka is obviously aware that Jerry is white, but it's not as if she's merging with the master race by being allowed to have sex with him. This is a really nice, intelligent story. Ratings "Between the Races" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Smith (appeal to reviewer): 10 "Miss-placed" by Stephanie (stephanie@nym.alias.net). Julian and Tony live some time in the future, and they have decided to take their vacation for two weeks at Dodge City, where androids recreate activities from the American Wild West. In addition, a sophisticated form of virtual reality enables the customers to project themselves into the bodies of android replicas of themselves, thus giving them the chance to experience the Wild West firsthand. As fate would have it, something goes awry, and Julian finds himself placed inside the body of an attractive female android. To be specific, he is inside the body of a dancing girl - and dancing girls in the nineteenth century sometimes moonlighted at a profession even older than dancing. I'm sure there are bad TG stories on Usenet, but those that I have read are almost always well written and extremely creative. This probably has something to do with the authors whose work I select. Almost all TG stories reflect on what a person might feel like if he (it's almost always a man) suddenly changes his gender. It becomes necessary for him to look at sexual activities from a different perspective. Guys who used to be exploitive in their relationships with women have the opportunity to find their tender side, and they eventually get the opportunity to be on the receiving rather than the giving end of a fucking relationship. This all happens in this story against a background of both futuristic science fiction and an old-fashioned cowboy story. I found what I thought were some logical fallacies in this story. For example, Julian goes an awful long time without food. I'm sure that if you look closely, you'll find more. But don't bother. The "Back to the Future" movies had major logical inconsistencies; but if I didn't look too hard, I enjoyed those shows immensely. The same thing is true here. Don't analyze too much: just read the story and enjoy it. A more serious annoyance arose from the fact that the author posted this story in serial fashion. This means that the author could not make adjustments in earlier chapters when these became necessary because of later plot developments. This also necessitated occasional summaries that disrupted the logical progression of the story. For example, Part 8 begins with several paragraphs that review the action up to that point. This information was necessary only because there had been a time lag between the author's posting of the 7th and 8th parts; but since I was reading the story consecutively, I did not need this summary, and it was distracting. Finally, I wasn't as impressed with the ending as I was with the rest of the story. I thought it was a bit forced. I honestly believe that this sort of letdown is likely to happen more often in serialized stories than when the author writes the whole story before posting it. However these shortcomings are minor. I supppose I just feel the urge to lecture a really good author once in a while - kinda like the way I like to tell my husband what he could have done better after he has given me a really great rim job. This is a really creative story. Read it and enjoy it - even if you're not a TG fan. Ratings "Miss-Placed" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Smith (appeal to reviewer): 10 The following is a Guest Review by Michael K. Smith, who frequently contributes stories to this newsgroup. "Exchange Program" by Clint Quinn (A+ Story). Classic science fiction is a tough genre in which to cast believable murder mysteries and erotic romances. (We're talking about "strange new worlds" here, not cyberpunk.) Asimov managed mysteries and this author does a very creditable job with erotica. Alain has gotten fed up with academic politics on Earth and emigrates to the idyllic pioneer planet of New Ontario (which leads me to suspect the author is Canadian . . .). Just as he arrives at his destination, his sister, Claudine, possessor of a legendary libido, is headed out to the world of Welnaria for a month. Her Welnarian exchange is Kera, a slightly modified human woman who appears to be an adolescent but is actually an acutely formal forty-plus years of age. The Welnarians have given up sex-for-pleasure in exchange for reproductive control; they now assume themselves to be irretrievably "numbed," as Kera puts it. But we know better, don't we? Mr. Quinn has a very smooth style and succeeds in evoking the energetic, liberated personality of a society made up largely of disgusted self-exiles for whom Earth no longer offers opportunities. (Alain's new best friend is Grigor, a Russian quantum- mechanic-turned-tractor-mechanic.) He also handles semi-alien sex very nicely, . . . though I would like to know just what Kera is saying when, in the throes of passion, she exclaims "Oss novit capetla!" The author also knows his grammar and can use a dictionary. He even knows that "lay" is the proper past tense of the intransitive verb "to lie" -- a knowledge I wish were shared by more posters. However, he seems not to realize that in dialogue, only one item of punctuation is needed to close a quote: A comma alone will do, but not a comma with a period, exclamation, or question mark. (Really a minor error, considering his obvious skill, but a reviewer has to find _something_ to pick on.) This is one of Ray Velez's reposted "A+ Stories," originally posted in 1995. DejaNews shows only one other (non-sf) erotic story posted by this author, which is a shame; New Ontario is a promising setting for more stories of this quality. Ratings for "Exchange Program" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Smith (appeal to reviewer): 10 "The Other Side" by Unknown Author (THC Archives). This is a "tommy" repost, with original date of July 1995 attached, but no author given. It follows a familiar basic plot - Wimp with small cock goes out looking for Stud to fuck Wimp's Girl Friend while Wimp watches; GF tells Wimp how much better Stud is (with "oh, ohh"s interspersed); and Wimp gets off on all this. Here we have the basic elements in a brisk utilitarian format - Wimp picks up Stud in bar in paragraph 1, GF is gasping at Stud's cock size by para 6. There are two twists to the grand (or tired) old plot here - this one is told from the point of view of Stud, not Wimp; and Wimp doesn't just watch, but nibbles on GF while Stud is fucking her which - ta-da! (or yuck) - creates some fleeting m/m contact. The POV reversal doesn't really provide much of a twist, as most of us guys can more readily imagine ourselves in the Stud role to begin with - the challenge is to see what Wimp gets out of it. In connection with the m/m: Stud has the capacity, common on a.s.s., for eyeball measurement. He spots GF as about 5'5", and about 34B. But interestingly he gives *more precise* estimates of Wimp's cock size. We know what that means. Sex descriptions are trite, but with some redeeming underlying lustiness. Form: 10 (though badly formatted) Literary Value: 7 Get-off Quotient (purely subjective): 8 The following review was written by Purple Shade, who has posted many stories to this newsgroup under a different name: "Goldilocks" by Robert Mitchell (zikzak23@nospamplease.com). Most of us are familiar with the childhood classic, Goldilocks and the Three Bears. This story of the same name by Robert Mitchell updates the classic to a more adult level. Goldilocks, a much more adventurous 19 year old in this version, finds herself lost in the forest after sneaking out of her house to meet her boyfriend. Luckily, she happens upon the home of family named Bear. The three bears, Melissa (Momma Bear), Paul (Papa Bear) and Barry (Baby Bear) are happy to invite her to share a dinner. She is surprised to discover that Porridge was the main course -- Passion Porridge to be exact. The effect of this unexpected treat should be obvious to anyone who's been on this newsgroup more than two days. Needless to say, the end result isn't the same as the version your mother told you at bedtime. I found the story to be original and highly entertaining and can recommend it highly. Ratings for "Goldilocks" (Added by Celeste) Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Purple Passion (appeal to reviewer): 10 * "Not Really Cheating" by Dave Schulte (THC Archives). This was one of the first hundred or so stories that I reviewed in CR. A man and a woman work together. Both of their spouses are too busy to satisfy them sexually; yet each wants to remain faithful and monogamous. They become aware of their mutual attraction to each other. They decide that since infidelity involves actual sex, it wouldn't really be cheating if they simply masturbated together; and so they do so. It's an interesting idea, and the story is well written. Incidentally, in my own opinion, this IS really cheating. In other words, I would consider myself to be unfaithful to my husband if I needed a sexual fix and got it by masturbating with a friend when my husband was too busy to satisfy me. Infidelity involves the violation of a relationship, and what the story describes is at least the beginning of the violation of a relationship. No real moral lesson here - just a commentary on the title. It was still an enjoyable story. By the way, in my morally acute mind, reading stories on a.s.s. and fantasizing about them does NOT constitute a violation of a relationship, even if Tammy Ng does write cynical letters to the reviewer Now you know why I read twenty of these stories a week! I had better talk to my husband. Ratings for "Not Really Cheating" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Smith (appeal to reviewer): 10 * "Lynn" by Dirty Dawg (drambo@primenet.com). No offense to any of the other authors, but at the time I first read it this was the BEST STORY I had yet reviewed during my first six months of reviewing stories for this newsgroup. It received my number 1 rating in my list of the Top 100 Stories of 1995. After reading this story, I tracked down many other stories written by this author (perhaps all of them). He has a distinctive style, and there's a pattern to his stories. Almost always a guy screws up a relationship and eventually redeems himself years later by coming to the aid of the woman whom he has always loved deep down in his heart and making sexy but tender love to her. If that sounds familiar, it's because that basic plot is actually a combination of (1) typical TV and movie romances plus (2) what you'd REALLY like the protagonists to do - or what you assume in your perverted mind they do during the fade-outs. If you like romance with your sex, read this story! Ratings for "Lynn" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Celeste (appeal to reviewer): 10 * "Once You're Rubbed" by Amy. This story has recently been reposted from the THC Archives. The following story, which is based on this one, is the better of the two; and I hope someone reposts it. I am reposting my original reviews of both. I vaguely remember seeing this story posted in a.s.s. As I recall, I glanced at it, noticed it was unfinished, and decided not to bother to download it. Big mistake! About an hour ago I received via e-mail a copy of this story from Backrub, along with his official notification that he intended to repost "Once You're Rubbed by Amy," which is a follow-up to this story. Big break! So I read this story, and it's excellent. It's basically a slow build-up for a big climax. It does a beautiful job of expressing the magic and insecurity of first meetings, of the beginnings of relationships. I found myself laughing and recalling experiences from my own life. The build-up itself is not devoid of sex; but its sexy in the sense that you just know something is going to happen, because the chemistry is right to begin with and it gets better as the story goes along. The only flaw with this story (and it's a big one) is that it's unfinished. It just plain stops before the climax. But Backrub solved that problem with the next story. Ratings for "Once You're Rubbed " Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 8 Celeste (appeal to reviewer): 8 * "Once You're Rubbed by Amy" by Backrub. This story finishes the previous story. In doing so, it retells the entire story from the man's point of view. Since a massage plays a pivotal role in this story, it is a story by Backrub about a backrub! I myself think the present story can stand alone, even if readers have not seen the previous story; but Backrub himself thinks that the two stories should be read together. Backrub also wrote "Across the Catty Corner," a follow-up to Sue's "Catty Corner." I reviewed those two stories in Celestial Reviews 9. I truly believe that the Catty Corner Combination was better than this set, but this is still an excellent, romantic, and sexy story. Ratings for "Once You're Rubbed by Amy" Athena (technical quality): 10 Venus (plot & character): 10 Celeste (appeal to reviewer): 10 Grammar Tip of the Week: INDEFINITE PRONOUNS. An indefinite pronoun is one that does not refer to a SPECIFIC person or thing. The most common indefinite pronouns are ALL, ANY, ANYBODY, ANYONE, ANYTHING, EACH, EITHER, EVERYBODY, EVERYONE, EVERYTHING, NEITHER, NOBODY, NONE, NO ONE, SOME, SOMEBODY, SOMEONE, and SOMETHING. The reason these are worth worrying about is that it makes a difference whether the indefinite pronoun is singular or plural, since this will influence verb and pronoun agreement. Anyone with a live cock IS welcome to join me in the bedroom. All the men with live cocks ARE welcome to join me in the bedroom. The good news is that it's usually possible to get these right, simply because the right usage "sounds" correct. The even better news is that even if you get these wrong, nobody except English teachers is likely to notice or care. In other words, if in real life a man says to a woman, "None of us are man enough to make you happy," you'll have a grammar mistake; but she'd be much more likely to have noticed the problem had you said, "We ain't got very big cocks." It's still a good idea to write as perfectly as possible, and so I'll now try to summarize the rules. In general, most of these indefinite pronouns are singular. That is, they refer to a single person or thing. SOMEBODY is going to get her brains fucked out tonight. NOBODY is going to get her brains fucked out tonight. ANYONE who sucks my cock is going to get her brains fucked out tonight. NEITHER of you is going to get her brains fucked out tonight. The main exceptions are ALL, ANY, SOME, and NONE. These words are sometimes singular and sometimes plural, depending on the context in which they are used. Each of these words is singular when it refers to a continuous quantity of something. (This usage sounds complicated, but it's easy, as the following examples show.) None of the cum WAS left in my hair after I showered. According to our prenuptial agreement, none of the money that I earned by selling my body BELONGS to you. Some of the cum WAS still left in my hair after I showered. According to our prenuptial agreement, any of the money that I earned by selling my body BELONGS to you. According to our prenuptial agreement, all of the money that I earned by selling my body BELONGS to you. Except in the case cited above ALL and SOME are always plural. Some of you guys ARE going to have to wait till have lunch to lick my pussy. All the guys I have ever made love to ARE cumming at the reunion. That leaves the two hard ones: NONE and ANY. The correct usage of NONE is a bit complicated; but if you think it over carefully, you can usually get it right. NONE usually means "no single one" or "not even one." When the word is used in this sense, it takes singular verbs and pronouns. None of the men HAS offered to let his wife join the orgy. None of you IS man enough to make me really happy. NONE is also singular when it means "no amount of" or "no part of," when the speaker is referring to a continuous quantity of something. This usage was described above. Use a plural verb and pronouns wit NONE only if the sense is "not any" when several are expected - that is, when NONE means "no number of persons or things." None of the slaves agree on the best way to lick their queen's pussy. This can be very useful information. If each of the following speakers is using grammar correctly, the listener would in one case be discussing an orgy (or at least several successive partners) and in the other a tryst with a single individual. None of you is going to sleep with me tonight. (single individual) None of you are going to sleep with me tonight. (potential orgy) To put it another way: None of you IS man enough to make me really happy. (single individual) None of you ARE men enough to make me really happy. . (potential orgy) The best way to ascertain which should be used, is to examine the logic of the original (or contrary) expectation. This sounds complicated, but in practice, it's not: None of you IS going to sleep with me tonight. ("You think ONE of you is going to sleep with me. That's not true.") None of you ARE going to sleep with me tonight. ("You think SOME of you are going to sleep with me. That's not true.") The use of ANY is exactly parallel to that of NONE. The verb and pronoun agreement with ANY is often easier to ascertain, because the logic is more apparent. If ANY refers to ONE unspecified person, it's singular; otherwise, it's plural. If any of you IS the one who slept with me last night, you can return my panties when you are finished sniffing them. Any of you IS man enough to make me really happy. Any of you who have a live cock are going to have a chance to sleep with me before the end of summer camp. If any of you IS going to sleep with me tonight, he should brush his teeth after supper. (You think it's likely or reasonable that only one person will do so.) If any of you ARE going to sleep with me tonight, they should brush their teeth after supper. (You are expecting an orgy or at least a major menage.) Note that some of these same words can be used as adjectives, but then the agreement problem is simplified, because the word that the adjective modifies will be either singular or plural. Any men who WANT to do the horizontal lambada with me should line up outside my room. Each man who WANTS to do the horizontal lambada with me should line up outside my room. Every man who WANTS to do the horizontal lambada with me should line up outside my room. BOTH and EACH. BOTH is plural. EACH is singular. The distinction between these words is worth noting. Misuse can get you in trouble, even with people who are not English teachers. Both of us ARE eager to get into her pants. Each of us IS eager to get into her pants. EACH is so singular that it can make a compound subject have a singular verb and pronoun references. Each infielder and outfielder IS going to get HIS shot at the coach's wife if they win the championship. EVERY works the same way. Every infielder and outfielder IS going to get HIS shot at the coach's wife if they win the championship. Oddly enough, if EACH is moved to a location after the compound subject, the verb and pronoun references become plural. {Note that the exact meaning of the sentence also changes.} Who said English isn't a bizarre and wonderful language? The infielder and outfielder each ARE going to get their shot at the coach's wife if they win the championship. EACH OTHER and ONE ANOTHER. EACH OTHER refers to reciprocal activity between two persons; ONE ANOTHER to reciprocal activity among three or more persons. We made love to EACH OTHER last night. ( A couple) We made love to ONE ANOTHER last night. (Orgy or menage) -- +--------------' Story submission `-+-' Moderator contact `------------+ | story-submit@qz.little-neck.ny.us | story-admin@qz.little-neck.ny.us | | Archive site +--------------------+------------------+ Newsgroup FAQ | \ .../assm/faq.html> /